From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f49IRlL03922 for linux-mips-outgoing; Wed, 9 May 2001 11:27:47 -0700 Received: from dea.waldorf-gmbh.de (IDENT:root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f49IRfF03906 for ; Wed, 9 May 2001 11:27:43 -0700 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by dea.waldorf-gmbh.de (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f49I9Yu02151; Wed, 9 May 2001 15:09:34 -0300 Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 15:09:34 -0300 From: Ralf Baechle To: Andreas Jaeger Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" , "Steven J. Hill" , Florian Lohoff , Tom Appermont , linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: Binary compatibility break understood ? Message-ID: <20010509150934.B2073@bacchus.dhis.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from aj@suse.de on Wed, May 09, 2001 at 03:18:12PM +0200 X-Accept-Language: de,en,fr Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 03:18:12PM +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" > Cc: "Steven J. Hill" , Florian Lohoff , > Tom Appermont , Ralf Baechle , > linux-mips@oss.sgi.com > Subject: Re: Binary compatibility break understood ? > From: Andreas Jaeger > Date: 09 May 2001 15:18:12 +0200 > > "Maciej W. Rozycki" writes: > > > On Wed, 9 May 2001, Steven J. Hill wrote: > > > > > --- glibc-2.2.3/sysdeps/mips/rtld-ldscript.in Sat Jul 12 18:23:14 1997 > > > +++ glibc-2.2.3-patched/sysdeps/mips/rtld-ldscript.in Sun Apr 29 22:32:35 2001 > > > @@ -1,4 +1,3 @@ > > > -OUTPUT_FORMAT("@@rtld-oformat@@") > > > OUTPUT_ARCH(@@rtld-arch@@) > > > ENTRY(@@rtld-entry@@) > > > SECTIONS > > > > I guess you want to remove rtld-oformat definitions from > > sysdeps/mips/mipsel/rtld-parms and sysdeps/mips/rtld-parms as well. They > > become dead code after your change. > > > > Alternatively define rtld-oformat to elf(32|64)-trad(little|big)mips > > where appropriate and require a minimal version of binutils in > > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/mips/configure.in. The requirement should be > > forced anyway and I guess version 2.11.1 may be a good candidate once it's > > out. > > Let's test features and not version numbers if possible. We have HJ > Lu's binutils and the official binutils and we should be careful here > testing for versions. It's only modutils which for correct functionality depends on the trad- format, so I don't see any real reason for raising version requirements for libc. Ralf