Re: (not) simplifying dpkg-shlibdeps with readelf
Hector Oron <hector.oron@gmail.com> writes:
> 2010/4/27 Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>:
>> I have a hard time imagining Debian ever supporting non-ELF
>> targets. We'd need to maintain a completely separate libc, for
>> instance, since I'm fairly sure glibc is ELF only.
> uClibc is on the archive (not usable for runtime), it was also added
> to dpkg as a new architecture, maybe someday we'll have a uClibc (w/
> MMU and w/o MMU).
I'm fairly sure that uClibc is ELF.
> We might need to support flat binaries for that.
I'm not sure what you mean by "flat binaries" here. ELF versus non-ELF is
a much more fundamental distinction than, say, whether or not something is
dynamically linked. I don't believe the Linux kernel will even run
non-ELF binaries without special module support.
> There are also some teams and individuals which have the desire to
> work on mobile world having Debian on them, for such purposes and
> maybe not officially, there is space for a bionic libc or some others
> that might be suitable for such purposes.
I see no reason why embedded platforms can't use ELF. ELF is very common
in the embedded world even entirely apart from Linux.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: