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

Bug#1050992: hwcap default search paths changed



Hi,

On 2023-09-01 09:14, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> Source: glibc
> Version: 2.37-1
> 
> Previously defined hwcap search paths have been changed. Those
> specified in `man 8 ld.so` are no longer accurate (bug #1050930).

[snip]

Yes, the old AT_HWCAP mechanism has been deprecated in glibc 2.33 in
favor of the glibc-hwcaps mechanism, and removed in glibc 2.37. Instead
of relying on a huge number of CPU feature combinations, the new
mechanism is based on architecture baseline level. For instance for
amd64 we have x86-64-v1 to x86-64-v4 levels defined directly in the ELF
x86-64-ABI psABI [1]. The supported directories can be queried by
running ld.so --help

That indeed means that the ld.so manpage need to be updated, thanks for
filling the bug against manpages-dev.

> Typical output on sid/i386:

> [...]

> Shared library search path:
>   (libraries located via /etc/ld.so.cache)
>   /lib/i386-linux-gnu (system search path)
>   /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu (system search path)
>   /lib (system search path)
>   /usr/lib (system search path)
> 
> No subdirectories of glibc-hwcaps directories are searched.
> [...]

Indeed no level has been yet defined for i386 and I am afraid nobody is
really interested in doing so.

> If I understand correctly, this render the following .so file obsolete (unused):
> 
> % file /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/sse2/libx264.so.164
> /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/sse2/libx264.so.164: ELF 32-bit LSB
> shared object, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked,
> BuildID[sha1]=e66974d10aef77af7ed504266cde974d103484d6, stripped
> 
> Possibly other packages might be impacted.
> 
> I suspect the best upgrade path is simply to document the old hwcap
> search path have been removed, and Debian package(s) should not rely
> on them anymore (lintian warning?).

This is already documented in the upstream NEWS.gz, but it might warrant
an additional entry in NEWS.Debian.gz. The lintian warning might be a
good idea depending how widely this is used in the archive. I'll
investigate and report back.

Regards
Aurelien

[1] https://gitlab.com/x86-psABIs/x86-64-ABI 

-- 
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurelien@aurel32.net                     http://aurel32.net


Reply to: