[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

question regarding prelinking (was: (inc. note from dpkg developers) (was: Bug#XXXXXX: (far too many packages) needs rebuilt for prelinking))

On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 08:33:41PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > Automatic file modifications, for any means, is a rather serious flaw, imho.
> I disagree with your categorical blanket here.  You might want to think
> about the options a little more, and come back if you have any actual
> arguments against it.  Meanwhile, once the other issues are resolved, I
> may just implement the prelink integration as a base for further
> discussion.

This is probably a stupid question, but:

Why couldn't .debs ship already-prelinked objects?  It's not like the
package build environment doesn't already have all the shared library
dependencies sitting right there.

Is it because our shlibdeps are (usually) not exact, and prelinking
requires having symbol addresses exactly right, which may not be the
case for, say, libX11.so.6.1 versus libX11.so.6.2, even though the two
are ABI-compatible?

Alternatively, if you have a prelinked binary and the prelinking is
wrong for the depended-upon shared objects on your system, is that a
fatal error, or does the loader figure this out and say "bah, this
prelinking is garbage, time to resolve the symbol dependencies the
old-fashioned way"?  If the latter, then there would seem to be little
to lose.

G. Branden Robinson                |     Exercise your freedom of religion.
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     Set fire to a church of your
branden@debian.org                 |     choice.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgp3lYIM7rj5n.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: