[uClibc] [Repost] Is there any advantage in utils/ldd being linked with uClibc?

[Manuel Novoa III]

On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 01:41:35PM -0700, Erik Andersen wrote:
> On Tue Jan 20, 2004 at 01:23:27PM -0700, Manuel Novoa III wrote:
> > > uClibc's ldd compiles and runs fine with glibc and stock gcc:
> > > 
> > > [charlieb at localhost utils]$ gcc -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes 
> > > -Wno-trigraphs 
> > > -fno-strict-aliasing -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -falign-jumps=0 
> > > -falign-loops=0 -Os -fno-builtin -I. -DNDEBUG -fPIC -D__LDSO_LDD_SUPPORT 
> > > -Wl,-s -DUCLIBC_RUNTIME_PREFIX= -DUCLIBC_LDSO=ld-uClibc.so.0 ldd.c -o ldd
> > > [charlieb at localhost utils]$ ./ldd ldd
> > >         libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0x00bb3000)
> > >         /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x00f38000)
> > > [charlieb at localhost utils]$ ldd ldd
> > >         libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0x00d90000)
> > >         /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x0015b000)
> > > [charlieb at localhost utils]$
> > > 
> > > Is there any advantage in compiling this tool against uClibc?
> > 
> > What am I missing?  ldd and all the other apps in uClibc/utils are
> > built to be run on the target.
> 
> Well, ldd for example can also be useful on the host.  Since
> there is no particular uClibc specific dependancy in these
> utilities, I think they should be compiled using whatever
> compiler and C library happens to be supplied when building
> that directory.

Well, it would certainly be ok with me to build both host and target
versions.  But I'd have to put it in the 'patches welcome' category.

Manuel