On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 11:29 AM Richard Henderson <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 10/6/22 11:12, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > The only possible silver linining is that in static linked builds, > > it appears that a QEMU constructor with priority 101, will pre-empt > > the constructor from any library. This is kind of crazy, as it means > > if any library or app code uses priorities, it'll get totally different > > execution ordering depending on whether it is dynamic or statically > > built. > > Plausible... >
> > I guess we could rely on this hack if we declare that everyone using > > binfmt is probably relying on static linked QEMU, and in non-binfmt > > cases people can set the env var themselves. It still feels pretty > > dirty. > > ... but as you say, dirty. FWIW, on FreeBSD at least, we don't support dynamically linked bsd-user and I'd go as far as to say that we have no desire to change that in the future, either -- the benefits are simply not there to outweigh the pain for our use-cases. Thanks, Kyle Evans
