From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jan  4 23:39:03 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2507716A418;
	Fri,  4 Jan 2008 23:39:03 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from sippysoft.com (gk.360sip.com [72.236.70.226])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D025613C442;
	Fri,  4 Jan 2008 23:39:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from [192.168.0.3] ([204.244.149.125]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by sippysoft.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m04NctfZ010632
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Fri, 4 Jan 2008 15:38:57 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org)
Message-ID: <477EC363.90902@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:38:11 -0800
From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org>
Organization: Sippy Software, Inc.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>
References: <477C82F0.5060809@freebsd.org> <863ateemw2.fsf@ds4.des.no>	
	<200801032200.25650.peter.schuller@infidyne.com>	
	<alpine.BSF.1.00.0801031305340.39341@goat.gigo.com>	
	<8663yac62d.fsf@ds4.des.no> <477E72FC.5070304@freebsd.org>	
	<477EA466.6060204@FreeBSD.org>
	<e7db6d980801041342k562a3459y39003036dc1a5528@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e7db6d980801041342k562a3459y39003036dc1a5528@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Jason Evans <jasone@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org,
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8?=, Tim Kientzle <kientzle@FreeBSD.org>,
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?rgrav?= <des@des.no>,
	Peter Schuller <peter.schuller@infidyne.com>
Subject: Re: ELF dynamic loader name [was: sbrk(2) broken]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 23:39:03 -0000

Peter Wemm wrote:
> While this doesn't count as an explicit vote against the rename, we can 
> solve the chroot problem easily.  I did this once already, but for some 
> reason never got around to committing it.
> 
> However, renaming ld-elf.so.1 is a bad idea in general.  Yes, it would 
> have been better to have had the arch name in there from the start, but 
> it doesn't.  It is unfortunate, but I feel that changing it will cause 
> far more pain across the board than it would solve for the specific case 
> of chrooting i386 binaries.  I don't think it is worth it.
> 
> There are a whole bunch of references to the ld-elf.so.1 name.  Not just 
> in our tree, but in external 3rd party code.  Even things like gdb 
> "know" how to handle ld-elf.so.1.  Getting those upstream folks to add 
> additional strcmp()'s for ld-elf-i386.so.1, ld-elf-amd64.so.1 etc will 
> be hard enough, and it will add another hurdle that minor platform 
> maintainers have to overcome.  ld-elf-mips-be-4Kc.so.1 anybody?  (ok, 
> that last one is a stretch)
> 
> Anyway, I'm not absolutely against it, but I think it will be a net loss 
> overall.  We'll have more pain than I think it is worth, especially 
> since the alternatives are much easier.

I see, what about moving it into /libexec/<arch>/? Is it better approach?

-Maxim