Rationale for giving .so files +x

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thursday 14 June 2007, Serge van den Boom wrote:
> What's the rationale for setting the executable bit on shared object files?

shared object codes include executable code so in order to map them with 
execute permissions, you need the +x bit

> The rest of a POSIX system treats files with the executable bit set as
> files that can be execve()'ed. With a few exceptions such as libc.so and
> ld.so, this is not the case for shared object files (at least not without
> an immediate SIGSEGV).

that's a different issue
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/attachments/20070614/e6b7f440/attachment.sig>