This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Is it a GNU Tools failure that PIE use ET_DYN and can't be distinguished from libraries?
- From: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- To: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 13:51:29 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: Is it a GNU Tools failure that PIE use ET_DYN and can't be distinguished from libraries?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <55070AEC dot 5080107 at redhat dot com>
> Is it a failing of the tooling that we didn't provide a way for
> tools to determine PIE vs. DSO?
It might be if we hadn't. But we defined a PIE as an ET_DYN with a
DT_DEBUG. (We didn't account for a case that would be useful and the
linker doesn't currently fully support: a static PIE, which is an ET_DYN
that has no PT_INTERP and might not have a PT_DYNAMIC either.)
> Was it always the goal to be able to dlopen a PIE? e.g. Implement
> both the daemon as a standalone executable and as a DSO you could
> load and run as a service?
That was indeed a goal at the inception of PIE.