Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 15:31:27 +0100 From: John Spencer <maillist-musl@...fooze.de> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: dlopen'ing glibc linked libraries Gabriel Jacobo wrote: > Hey everyone! First message here... > > I recently found about musl when googling for GLIBC alternatives. I read in > the FAQ that binary compatibility with GLIBC is not there yet, so my > question is if this is a priority for the library. GLIBC compat is already pretty good, given that the glibc stuff was compiled in a sane manner (i.e. with the flags that enable 64bit off_t). for example, it is possible to run Dwarf Fortress: http://openwall.com/lists/sabotage/2013/11/01/1 it's also possible to run opera with a preloaded .so that provides a few symbols that musl doesn't provide. > > As a bit of background to my question, let me say that I'm an SDL2 > contributor, and I've tried linking SDL against musl, which seemed to work > great. I'm linking dynamically BTW (statically linking to musl didn't quite > work, I didn't research the issue much but it's probably a problem in SDL's > build system). statically linked musl does not support dlopen(), so you will have a hard time loading plugins (explanation for why it is not supported: http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2012/12/08/4 ) > > However, SDL uses dlopen/dlsym heavily to load most of its functionality i guess this kind of plug-in loading is considered a bad idea by most people here... > (for example, to load the libGL.so.1 binary in order to provide OpenGL > support), and these binaries depend on GLIBC...so (expectedly?) almost that's not quite true, sabotage linux builds mesa fine (with 2 minor patches). recipe: https://github.com/sabotage-linux/sabotage/blob/master/pkg/mesalib#L19 patches: https://github.com/sabotage-linux/sabotage/blob/master/KEEP/mesalib-fpclassify.patch https://github.com/sabotage-linux/sabotage/blob/master/KEEP/mesalib-strtod.patch https://github.com/sabotage-linux/sabotage/blob/master/KEEP/mesalib-strtof.patch > nothing actually works with the SDL/musl binary. basically what you should try to do is build all dependencies against musl. > So, will it ever work? even if it would work, mixing glibc and musl linked things is far from optimal. > > Thanks! btw, you might be interested in this SDL bug: https://bugzilla.libsdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2019
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.