Quoting Daniel O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (from Tue, 28 Oct 2008
10:18:10 +1030):
On Tuesday 28 October 2008 01:31:16 M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Oliver Fromme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Daniel O'Connor wrote:
: > On Friday 24 October 2008 23:20:59
On Tuesday 28 October 2008 01:31:16 M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Oliver Fromme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> : > On Friday 24 October 2008 23:20:59 Peter Jeremy wrote:
> : > > > this will make system trying to bind 32-bit libs
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Oliver Fromme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Daniel O'Connor wrote:
: > On Friday 24 October 2008 23:20:59 Peter Jeremy wrote:
: > > > this will make system trying to bind 32-bit libs to 64-bit program. it
: > > > can't work
: > >
: > > rtld shouldn'
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> On Friday 24 October 2008 23:20:59 Peter Jeremy wrote:
> > > this will make system trying to bind 32-bit libs to 64-bit program. it
> > > can't work
> >
> > rtld shouldn't attempt to bind 32-bit libs to 64-bit programs.
>
> The same problem happens with the Linux r
On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:10:53 -0400
"Alexander Sack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Alexander Kabaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 08:49:19 -0400
> > "Alexander Sack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Is this a bug or not in FreeBSD's rtl
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Alexander Kabaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 08:49:19 -0400
> "Alexander Sack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Is this a bug or not in FreeBSD's rtld?
>>
>> -aps
>
> It is not. In case it was not clear before, I maintain that you _ask_
> rtld
On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 08:49:19 -0400
"Alexander Sack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is this a bug or not in FreeBSD's rtld?
>
> -aps
It is not. In case it was not clear before, I maintain that you _ask_
rtld for wrong behaviour and you get back what you asked for, down to
the letter. 'Tasting' l
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 7:28 PM, Daniel O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 24 October 2008 23:20:59 Peter Jeremy wrote:
>> >this will make system trying to bind 32-bit libs to 64-bit program. it
>> >can't work
>>
>> rtld shouldn't attempt to bind 32-bit libs to 64-bit programs.
>
> The
On Friday 24 October 2008 23:20:59 Peter Jeremy wrote:
> >this will make system trying to bind 32-bit libs to 64-bit program. it
> >can't work
>
> rtld shouldn't attempt to bind 32-bit libs to 64-bit programs.
The same problem happens with the Linux run time linker - it merrily tries to
link Free
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Peter Jeremy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008-Oct-24 10:43:04 +0200, Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> 6.1-RELEASE-amd64 machine. If I add /usr/lib32 to my LD_LIBRARY_PATH
>>> it breaks all of my binaries on my 64-bit machine.
>>
>>what do you expe
On 2008-Oct-24 10:43:04 +0200, Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 6.1-RELEASE-amd64 machine. If I add /usr/lib32 to my LD_LIBRARY_PATH
>> it breaks all of my binaries on my 64-bit machine.
>
>what do you expect else?
Well, the rtld should be smart enough to recognize 32-bit .so's and
s
6.1-RELEASE-amd64 machine. If I add /usr/lib32 to my LD_LIBRARY_PATH
it breaks all of my binaries on my 64-bit machine.
what do you expect else?
this will make system trying to bind 32-bit libs to 64-bit program. it
can't work
___
freebsd-questions
In the last episode (Oct 23), Alexander Sack said:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Alexander Kabaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > LD_LIBRARY_PATH is for native 64bit rtld. If you want a specific
> > path added for use by 32-bit ld-elf.so.1 only, use
> > LD_32_LIBRARY_PATH.
> >
> > Said that, y
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Alexander Sack wrote:
Alright, well I found some weirdness:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# export
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/bin:/usr/lib:/usr/lib32:/usr/lib64
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# LD_DEBUG=1 ls
/libexec/ld-elf.so.1 is initialized, base address = 0x800506000
RTLD dynamic = 0x80062ad78
R
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 22:31:40 -0400
"Alexander Sack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes I figured that out on my own but my question still exists, why
> isn't /usr/lib similar in format to /usr/lib32 though with respect to
> major numbers? Actually now that I re-read your paragraph I suppose
> thi
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:48:47 -0400
"Alexander Sack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks, comments most appreciated. Damn, I was looking for someone to
> go "a ha, you can't do this because" Alright, let me see why rtld
> on 6.1-amd64 is picking up /usr/lib32 stuff for a native 64-bit binary
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Alexander Kabaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:48:47 -0400
> "Alexander Sack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, comments most appreciated. Damn, I was looking for someone to
>> go "a ha, you can't do this because" Alright, let me s
Alright, well I found some weirdness:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# export
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/bin:/usr/lib:/usr/lib32:/usr/lib64
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# LD_DEBUG=1 ls
/libexec/ld-elf.so.1 is initialized, base address = 0x800506000
RTLD dynamic = 0x80062ad78
RTLD pltgot = 0x0
processing main program's pr
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 9:23 PM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> If you look at the rtld(1) man page, there are a number of environment
>> variables you can set to debug the loader. I'm not sure how helpful
>> they are, though.
>
"Alexander Sack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have some weird behavior I'm trying to figure out and was wondering
> if someone can point me in the right direction. I'm running a FreeBSD
> 6.1-RELEASE-amd64 machine. If I add /usr/lib32 to my LD_LIBRARY_PATH
> it breaks all of my binaries on my
Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you look at the rtld(1) man page, there are a number of environment
> variables you can set to debug the loader. I'm not sure how helpful
> they are, though.
You can rebuild rtld(1) with debugging enabled:
% cd /usr/src/libexec/rtld-elf
% make
Hello:
I have some weird behavior I'm trying to figure out and was wondering
if someone can point me in the right direction. I'm running a FreeBSD
6.1-RELEASE-amd64 machine. If I add /usr/lib32 to my LD_LIBRARY_PATH
it breaks all of my binaries on my 64-bit machine.
For example:
[EMAIL PROTECT
22 matches
Mail list logo
