Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 11:06:25 +0800 From: Lei Zhang <zhanglei.april@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Cc: Khem Raj <raj.khem@...il.com>, Luca Barbato <lu_zero@...too.org> Subject: Re: Dynamic linker name 2016-06-14 23:56 GMT+08:00 Lei Zhang <zhanglei.april@...il.com>: > 2016-06-14 23:11 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola@...il.com>: >> Sorry, but my understanding is that r272662 is correct for x86, no? >> >> We can definitely add support for more arches with musl if someone sends a >> patch to the list. > > If no one intends to do this, I can prepare further patches and > relevant test cases for other archs. Now I'm determining the $ARCH field in musl's dynamic linker name for non-x86 archs. After reading these two patches (thanks to their authors): http://git.alpinelinux.org/cgit/aports/plain/main/clang/clang-0004-Add-musl-targets-and-dynamic-linker.patch https://github.com/kraj/meta-clang/blob/master/recipes-devtools/clang/clang/0001-clang-driver-Add-musl-ldso-support.patch I got the following list: i386 x86_64 arm armhf armeb armebhf aarch64 aarch64_be mips mipsel mips64 mipsel64el // this one looks weird powerpc powerpc64 Is this list comprehensive? Is there anything wrong? I have no access to non-x86 machines at the moment, thus no way to verify them. BTW, I leaved out x32 on purpose, since musl's support for it is experimental (right?), and it requires yet another environment type "muslx32" in LLVM. Thanks, Lei
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.