On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 10:06:56AM -0800, Kevin Squail Endres wrote:
> the below is from personal experience and does not rely on updating
> ld.so.cache... i am sure there is a more *correct* way to deal with this. (i
> am upgrading to the 2.95.3 toolchain and i assumed i could just use ld and
> libc in my RFS - but i ran into the same issue as you Rafael)
>
> run the following command on your host.
>
> objdump -s --section=.interp libc-2.2.2.so
>
> this gives you the assumed path to ld. i have been unable to get a working
> system unless ld.so and libc are at this location
I binary edited /lib/ld.so so it would look for ld.so.conf and
ld.so.cache in /etc instead of ${prefix}/arm-linux/etc. I consider it a
bug in glibc (the old versions didn't have this behaviour), but no
doubt the GNU people will have a perfectly reasonable explanation for
this behaviour :)
Erik
--
J.A.K. (Erik) Mouw, Information and Communication Theory Group, Faculty
of Information Technology and Systems, Delft University of Technology,
PO BOX 5031, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands Phone: +31-15-2783635
Fax: +31-15-2781843 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www-ict.its.tudelft.nl/~erik/
_______________________________________________
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm
Please visit the above address for information on this list.
