From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay.dream-property.net (relay.dream-property.net [178.19.67.222]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web12.40478.1589805017095448755 for ; Mon, 18 May 2020 05:30:18 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=fail, err=bad algorithm. Only rsa-sha1 or rsa-sha256 are permitted; spf=pass (domain: opendreambox.org, ip: 178.19.67.222, mailfrom: obi@opendreambox.org) Received: from mail.dream-property.net (mail.dream-property.net [82.149.226.172]) by relay.dream-property.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1B86100BBBF5; Mon, 18 May 2020 12:30:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ip-176-199-141-47.hsi06.unitymediagroup.de [176.199.141.47]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.dream-property.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1E245314212B; Mon, 18 May 2020 14:30:10 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=opendreambox.org; s=dkim; t=1589805011; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=c+Nn3Irchw1lpDrgD49RpAjrZpthRv9ypVbLwBrkS4Q=; b=qdW+72k/xVnidhZxVqdiVOwTBZTAUlLo2RL3B4VBKOxN7HQSaBmfv3Ue+DIMQnxbEURoFR bKCIoF2rKSLavnCg== Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 14:29:59 +0200 From: "Andreas Oberritter" To: Rasmus Villemoes Cc: Martin Jansa , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer , Richard Purdie , Khem Raj Subject: Re: [PATCH] glibc: move ld.so.conf back to main package Message-ID: <20200518142959.57fda0cc@opendreambox.org> In-Reply-To: <0397befe-9f5d-a704-be07-00926fd3fffa@prevas.dk> References: <20200518113617.31831-1-rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk> <0397befe-9f5d-a704-be07-00926fd3fffa@prevas.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Rasmus, On Mon, 18 May 2020 14:12:43 +0200 Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > I'm certainly open to other ways of solving this. But can we agree that > it is a bug that the ldconfig done at build-time does not take > /etc/ld.so.conf.d/* into account, and that that should not depend on > whether one has ldconfig-the-binary on target? have you tried installing ldconfig and adding it to ROOTFS_RO_UNNEEDED? It might be an improvement to include it in ROOTFS_RO_UNNEEDED by default. Please consider use-cases where writable filesystems ship without ldconfig, but a user installs it from a package feed when needed. Best regards, Andreas