Please remove paths from libc.so.

[Rob Landley]

On Thursday 28 December 2006 8:35 am, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 December 2006 04:09, Rob Landley wrote:
> > There's no reason to have paths in linker scripts like libc.so.  If you
> > remove the paths and just name the libraries, the linker will search the
> > default path
> 
> this is exactly the behavior we do not want

Why?

I admit that going to all the trouble of creating path-traversal code and then 
wiring around it is a very FSF thing to do.  Doesn't make it a good thing.  
Getting the paths _right_ is a good thing, which is the approach I took.  
(And since I asked this question, I made a trivial patch to rip the sed 
invocations out of the uClibc install and life is good for me now.)

> > get the right result when you have a relocatable toolchain.
> 
> a sysroot-ed toolchain works just fine for me

And mine works fine for me without it:
  http://landley.net/code/firmware/downloads

I remember poking at sysroot a few months back.  The new layer of path 
mangling logic they added on top of the previous five layers of path mangling 
logic was probably the ugliest of the lot.  I don't quite remember how I 
broke it, I just remember that I found something obvious it couldn't do.  Not 
an unusual experience for me...

Rob
-- 
"Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but
when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery