[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:10:36 -0500
From: Bobby Bingham <koorogi@...rogi.info>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com, John Mudd <johnbmudd@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Re: 32 bit musl?
On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 04:44:44PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> * John Mudd <johnbmudd@...il.com> [2016-10-09 10:29:02 -0400]:
> > On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 9:55 PM, John Mudd <johnbmudd@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Rich's musl-cross-make builds 32-bit executables that use musl libs. It
> > > kills two birds with one stone. That's great.
> > >
> > > But it appears to expect musl libc to be installed in /lib for dynamically
> > > linked executables. That's not an option for me. Is there a way I can
> > > override this?
> > >
> > >
> > Thanks Laurent, I used symbolic link in /lib for testing on my development
> > machine. That works well. But I don't have reasonable access to root user
> > when I deploy for production.
>
> deploy static linked binary or use explicit -Wl,-dynamic-linker
Using -Wl,-dynamic-linker will result in binaries that will not run on
normal musl systems.
If you can deploy the musl libc alongside your program, you can invoke it
as `/path/to/libc.so /path/to/your/program`. This can be done by a shell
script you also deploy.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
