From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18453 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2014 23:04:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 18441 invoked by uid 89); 17 Jan 2014 23:04:09 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-ve0-f175.google.com Received: from mail-ve0-f175.google.com (HELO mail-ve0-f175.google.com) (209.85.128.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 17 Jan 2014 23:04:08 +0000 Received: by mail-ve0-f175.google.com with SMTP id jx11so1847241veb.6 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2014 15:04:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.221.20.199 with SMTP id qp7mr39768vcb.24.1389999846855; Fri, 17 Jan 2014 15:04:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.58.178.207 with HTTP; Fri, 17 Jan 2014 15:04:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20140113181623.GW8293@linaro.org> References: <52CDD48A.80009@redhat.com> <20140113181623.GW8293@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 23:04:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] [AArch64] Define BE loader name. From: Andrew Pinski To: Steve McIntyre Cc: "libc-ports@sourceware.org" , Marcus Shawcroft , "Carlos O'Donell" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-01/txt/msg00036.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote: > [ I hope this threads OK - replying to the thread using the list > archives... ] > > Carlos wrote: >> >>We need technical arguments from both sides to reach consensus. >> >>Marcus has to come up with real reasons for needing the new dynamic >>linker name. > > Carlos already contributed to a ML discussion that happened after > Linaro Connect in November last year, where we had broad consensus > from the distros about separating the dynamic linker names for BE and > LE systems: > > http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/cross-distro/2013-November/000570.html > > As a background to that, I'm the team lead for Big Endian work in the > Linaro Networking Group (LNG). For a variety of reasons we're working > on supporting both BE and LE code on a single system and we're > investigating various options. Yes, it's a *horrible* idea but there > are people who really want to use this. I can envisage places where we > may want to have have both BE and LE binaries co-existing in the same > system, and it would be nice if that's not locked out here. > > I'll be honest: I *don't* think that the general purpose Linux distros > are likely to care about BE ARM or AArch64 systems in the same way as > us, but who knows what might come up? > >>Andrew, you need to come up with concrete reasons for not wanting to >>use a symlink or a copy. >> >>This is *exactly* the same kind of change we made for the 32-bit ARM >>hard-float dynamic linker name change. > > Yup, Been there, done that. In future, would it not make sense in > general to try and keep dynamic linkers separated by default? > >>The only wrinkle is that a symlink doesn't actually work: >>https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2012-10/msg00670.html >> >>If Markus is suggesting using a symlink he'll have to look into the >>problem I posted, because the last time I checked the symlink setup >>didn't work and required a hack to be used until all binaries had >>been migrated. > > Yup. :-( I remember the hack I came up with, and I've pointed Marcus > at it to help him understand what we did and why: > > http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-glibc/glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/arm/local-soname-hack.diff?view=markup > >>Thankfully in the case of the hard-float dynamic linker name change >>we had consensus that the name change was needed to support a mixed >>environment. I withdraw my objection to the patch. Though I do feel this discussion should have been done on the GCC/glibc list in addition to the linaro cross distro list as not every one knows about that list. Thanks, Andrew Pinski > > Right. > > Cheers, > -- > Steve McIntyre steve.mcintyre@linaro.org > Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs >