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

RE: One question about change linux-dynlinker to lsb-dynlinker

> On Tuesday 13 August 2002 03:47 am, Shou Hua Wang wrote:
> >
> > Could somebody else tell me why LSB SI need to change this, 
> and can I do
> > this link manullay after the system was built(Both ld.so.1 
> and ld-lsb.so.1
> > are link to ld-2.2.5.so)?
> >
> Sorry, I thought I replied to this a week ago.
> The ld-lsb is meant to enable the LSB to use a different 
> glibc and linker than 
> the existing system.  This way we can stablilize on say glibc 
> 2.2.5 while the 
> linux distros move on to the newer version (like say 3.0 some day).

The alternate name for the LSB dynamic linker is mandated
by the LSB spec, not by the LSB-si.

I guess the irritation is that in an environment where a
processor is not yet fully released within the LSB, things
like the test suite are being built using the Linux
linker, instead of the LSB linker, since the expectation
is that there won't be a conforming system to run the tests
on.  This, in turn gives the two of us (PPC, Itanium) doing 
testing on an LSB-si on an unreleased platform a bit of a
headache, but I think we're the only two people who will
be troubled by it; it's something I'm prepared to live
with, at least, but I think it's getting close to the time
when the tests should be built against the LSB linker....


Reply to: