Re: Link extra-libs consistently with libc and ld.so

[Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com>]

> > elfobjdir and elf-objpfx are redundant.  We should consolidate on just one
> > or the other.  I don't think it matters which.  For linking, using ld.so
> > makes sense.  There is no need to use $(rtld-installed-name).
> 
> I've added this consolidation to the wiki todo list.

Good enough.

> Now, maybe sotruss-lib.so could be built in a different way that happens 
> after linkobj/libc.so is built.  But the principle of consistency with 
> building with an installed compiler and libc suggests that linkobj/libc.so 
> should only be used when necessary.

Fair enough.

> I'd think such a linker script might as well include absolute paths; a 

We take some pains in other places to avoid those.  It means you can move
your build directory around without breaking everything.

> No, tested with normal testsuite runs.  I don't expect everything to be 
> unchanged, given that various objects were previously linked 
> unconditionally with ld.so and after the patch have a --as-needed link 
> with ld.so (so some may not end up with a dependency on ld.so after all).

I'd like to see at least verification that no actual code changed, and
diffs of readelf -d output where it changed.


Thanks,
Roland