https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #26 from mintsuki <mintsuki at protonmail dot com> --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #24) > (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. Well, evidently it works fine enough for Limine to load these properly as made by ld.bfd, lld, or gold... Honestly to me this seems more of a glibc bug than anything, unless I am missing something. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
