Re: Y2038 - best way forward in Debian?
* Steve McIntyre:
>>In addition if we are using a new multiarch triplet, and need to
>>rebuild the world, are going to be ABI incompatible anyway, we might
>>as well use a proper multiarch-qualified ld.so pathname that does
>>not collide with anything.
>
> Hmmm. Moving ld.so is *hard* - we were already bitten by stuff here
> when we bootstrapped armhf initially. What we didn't know then (but
> know now!) is that the final element of the path (i.e. the filename)
> must be globally unique for glibc's code to work. We can't (for
> example) just move ld-linux-armhf.so.3 to a new directory, we'd have
> to rename the file itself. (Apologies if this is stuff you already
> know - I think it's worth explaining for others too!)
These changes also require updates to the ABI manual and upstream
patches to the toolchain.
I don't think Debian's multi-arch path changes have been properly
upstreamed yet, either. Of course it does not help that key parts of
the GNU toolchain are more or less dead upstream; the lack of an
autoconf release is a real problem.
Reply to: