On Thu, 29 Dec 2005, Jon wrote:
Greets all. I was wondering if someone could briefly explain the difference
between these 2 linkers. I'm building current SVN on a G3 Powerbook Pismo and
I'm ending up with ld.so.1 for the toolchain.... (First 3 packages have
compiled flawlessly by the way. I'm suprised)
Is that an 'Old World' machine ? No need to be surprised that most
things build, people have been doing LFS on ppc for years. At the
moment I'm on an iBook - the "old system on it is LFS-6.1, the current
system is CLFS from a couple of months ago. CLFS certainly supports
ppc, but we only deal with New World at the moment (trying to include
instructions for a bootloader we can't test isn't much fun).
I know the book clearly hints that this is not a big deal (to just change the
sed to ld.so.1), but Slackintosh and other PPC distros are using
ld-linux.so.2... For some reason, I am under the assumtion that ld.so.1 is
inferior to ld-linux.so.2...
Not at all. On ppc, ld.so.1 is normal, ld-linux.so.2 is normally
unknown (fedora, ubuntu, debian, and from memory yellowdog, all use
ld.so.1 on ppc). Which other distros are using it ?
I think that on x86, ld.so.1 was an old version, perhaps for libc5,
which would explain why ld-linux.so.2 is better _on_x86_ .
If so, and there are clear and tangible benefits from using ld-linux, does
anyone know how I can acomplish this? The Slackintosh changelog hints at the
same problem but then they figured out how to do it without documenting it
anywhere. No patches, .SlackBuilds or anything... :-( Just a cryptic
changelog entry. Google and various src rpm Spec files haven't been helping
me much either...
I imagine the Slackintosh packagers are renaming it, with some seds
throughout the toolchain, but the purpose, or point, of doing that
escapes me.
Ken
--
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
