From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:59:41 +0200 From: Bernhard Walle Message-ID: <20130814095941.GA17817@regiomontanus.your-server.de> References: <1376472872-7936-1-git-send-email-bernhard@bwalle.de> <520B5254.7090708@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <520B5254.7090708@pengutronix.de> Subject: Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] glibc: Make it possible to install ldd Reply-To: ptxdist@pengutronix.de List-Id: PTXdist Development Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ptxdist-bounces@pengutronix.de Errors-To: ptxdist-bounces@pengutronix.de To: Marc Kleine-Budde Cc: ptxdist@pengutronix.de * Marc Kleine-Budde [2013-08-14 11:48]: > On 08/14/2013 11:34 AM, Bernhard Walle wrote: > > The standalone ldd of ptxdist doesn't work with all toolchains. > > For example, for my ct-ng based toolchain, /lib/ld-linux-armhf.so.3 > > must be in the RTLDLIST. > > > > Instead of adding more intelligence to the script, we just install the > > ldd from the toolchain which already has the right RTLDLIST. > > > > The patch also adds some guard for the standalone ldd to avoid selecting > > both variants in the configuration. > > Does the ldd from the toolchain work with /bin/sh == busybox? Yes, because it has '#!/bin/bash' in the first line. Well, that's indeed a problem. I personally tend to add bash to "development" images (where I add ldd), so for me adding a bash dependency would not be a problem. Hm .... Regards, Bernhard -- ptxdist mailing list ptxdist@pengutronix.de