Please remove paths from libc.so.
Rob Landley
rob at landley.net
Sat Dec 30 04:41:45 UTC 2006
On Thursday 28 December 2006 8:35 am, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 December 2006 04:09, Rob Landley wrote:
> > There's no reason to have paths in linker scripts like libc.so. If you
> > remove the paths and just name the libraries, the linker will search the
> > default path
>
> this is exactly the behavior we do not want
Why?
I admit that going to all the trouble of creating path-traversal code and then
wiring around it is a very FSF thing to do. Doesn't make it a good thing.
Getting the paths _right_ is a good thing, which is the approach I took.
(And since I asked this question, I made a trivial patch to rip the sed
invocations out of the uClibc install and life is good for me now.)
> > get the right result when you have a relocatable toolchain.
>
> a sysroot-ed toolchain works just fine for me
And mine works fine for me without it:
http://landley.net/code/firmware/downloads
I remember poking at sysroot a few months back. The new layer of path
mangling logic they added on top of the previous five layers of path mangling
logic was probably the ugliest of the lot. I don't quite remember how I
broke it, I just remember that I found something obvious it couldn't do. Not
an unusual experience for me...
Rob
--
"Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but
when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
More information about the uClibc
mailing list