Re: [Valgrind-developers] re: netbsd/i386 port of valgrind

[Julian S. <js...@ac...>]

On Wednesday 10 August 2005 00:07, Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message <200...@ac...>
>
>           Julian Seward <js...@ac...> wrote:
> > >> Solaris 10 doesn't allow static executables. The
> > >
> > > reasons they give are here
> >
> > Euh, that sucks, but it doesn't surprise me.  There just
> > doesn't seem to be a portable way of making an executable
> > _and_ all the shared objects it depends on be loaded in
> > an out-of-the way place.
>
> Is there much difference between statically and dynamically linked
> executables which don't reference any libraries though?

Well ... one would hope not.  But it's a bit like Russian Roulette.
If for any reason the dynamic loader decides to map in any .so at
all, then we are screwed.  It might be OK on Linux, but who knows
what the Solaris/NetBSD/MacOSX/whatever loader is going to do.

> Sure the dynamic loader will run but if we don't use libc (or any
> other system libraries) then it won't have anything to do.

I guess so; if we can guarantee that we don't use any system
libraries.  I was hoping to finish my de-glibc-ification of 
branches/ASPACEM today, but didn't make it.  Anyway, once I 
do the next thing I want to try is to do the final link with
-nostdlib, which sounds like a Good Thing to me.

-----------

Another way to answer your question is: "Yes, in theory I
agree.  But as is well known, theory and practice coincide
only in theory".

J