Subject: glibc-only system

From: Mark Huang <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 10:27:46 EDT

Hi,

I'm trying to build a glibc-only Linux-ARM system to save space, and started 
with the ramdisk at ftp://ssdl-redstone.stanford.edu/pub/ramdisk.gz. I've 
managed to recompile most of the system binaries against glibc (mostly from 
Debian sources, with some exceptions), but when I try to get rid of 
libc.so.4.6.27, the system refuses to boot. I think I've tracked the 
dependency down to one of /bin/login or /sbin/init. Whenever I replace either 
of these two with my own compiled versions (with or without libc4 in place), 
the system also refuses to boot.

Anyway, if anyone has compiled a glibc-only system, I'd be most grateful if 
you could tell me what sources you compiled from, or where you got the 
binaries from.

Thanks in advance,

--Mark

unsubscribe: body of `unsubscribe linux-arm' to [email-masked]

---

From: Alex Holden <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:44:51 +0100 (GMT)

> you could tell me what sources you compiled from, or where you got the 

Should't init be statically linked? Do you get any error messages? You can
use ldd to find what things are linked against, and you can try booting
with /bin/sh as init if your real init is having problems.

--------------- Linux- the choice of a GNU generation. --------------
: Alex Holden (M1CJD)- Caver, Programmer, Land Rover nut, Radio Ham :

---

From: Philip Blundell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:40:06 +0100

>you could tell me what sources you compiled from, or where you got the 

I have a glibc-only Debian distribution here and it seems to work fine.  Have 
you got the floating point emulator compiled into the kernel?

p.

---

From: Philip Blundell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:57:20 +0100

>Should't init be statically linked?

Not really.  There are a few reasons you might want to do this but none of 
them are especially compelling.  There have been rumours in the past that 
static binaries don't work especially well with the current ARM toolchain.

p.

---

From: Nicolas Pitre <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 20:40:26 -0400 (EDT)

> static binaries don't work especially well with the current ARM toolchain.

You say?
The application I work on is a single big binary which is staticaly
linked and it apparently works OK.  It's the only binary running on the
system but it shouldn't matter.

Nicolas Pitre, B. ing.
[email-masked]

---

From: Philip Blundell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 09:43:15 +0100

>system but it shouldn't matter.

Well, it was your code I was thinking of when I said there were rumours that 
it didn't work.  I thought you were having trouble with floating point at one 
time.  If it's OK now then I have no evidence that breakage remains, though I 
still wouldn't recommend anyone to use static binaries unless there is a 
particular reason to do so.

p.