This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: RFC V4 test-in-container
- From: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: fweimer at redhat dot com, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:16:24 -0400
- Subject: Re: RFC V4 test-in-container
Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> writes:
> I remain concerned about copying /bin/sh rather than having a local
> sh-substitute. Can using the newly built dynamic linker to trace what's
> required by /bin/sh really work even in as simple a case as testing i386
> glibc on an x86_64 system, where /bin/sh is a 64-bit binary?
I can write a /bin/sh substitute as long as none of our tests test *it*
and not just the calls that require it ;-)
I think one caveat is that we need to decide where and how to document
it so that future test writers don't assume full /bin/sh functionality.
But I suspect it would work; the scriptlet copies libc.so from the host
system as well as everything else. If it's the "wrong" libc.so (/lib vs
/lib64) we won't override it with our own. It would only be a
"sufficiently reliable coincidence" though.