This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Removal of unexec support from glibc malloc

On 01/18/2016 11:27 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016, Daniel Colascione wrote:
>> On 01/18/2016 11:54 AM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Daniel Colascione <> wrote:
>>>> As long as the ABI support is there, we can keep using the "separate
>>>> malloc implementation" even if glibc doesn't cooperate by providing
>>>> convenient headers to access it.
>>> Clarification: it will not be possible to link new executables against
>>> the symbols in question. (This is what a "compat symbol" in glibc is -
>>> available only to existing binaries, not to new invocations of ld.)
>> Oh, with a linker script or other hackery, I'm sure I could make it
>> available to new invocations of ld. It's just bytes.
> Being a compat symbol also means that future architecture ports and ABIs 
> don't include the functionality at all.

And even if the symbol is still there, the the version you need to
supply will be architecture-specific.  Don't do this. :)


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]