Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 13:00:05 +0100 From: u-wsnj@...ey.se To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: dynamic linking (Re: musl and android) On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 06:01:58AM -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > copy of the dynamic linker (libc.so/ld-musl) in the package > and executing the program via a wrapper script that manually invokes > the dynamic linker (so the hard-coded PT_INTERP pathname isn't > needed). > But these are not the approaches I'd like to be > recommending in the long term... :( Actually I believe (and know from long time experience) this to be the only "sane"/robust/general way to run dynamically linked executables. I don't think that the implications of hardcoding the interpreter path were well understood when dynamic linking was first deployed, the hardcoding merely became percepted as the only/natural approach when the purpose was to cheaply imitate the behaviour of statically linked programs. (This mimics the #!/... which is similarly limited/broken. The plain text scripts are though relatively easy to modify to hack around the limitation, according to local curcumstances) Rune
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.