https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #24 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to mintsuki from comment #22) > As far as I can tell, the linked issue seems to indicate more so that this > is indeed a problem rather than some glibc bug. > > Does glibc crash without any patch if you patch ld.bfd to create an ET_DYN > instead? My ld ET_EXEC change predates static PIE. lld generates ET_DYN and there is no way for static PIE with non-zero load address to work if marked ET_DYN. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
