Distinguishing SF/HF ABI binaries, take two

2012-08-02 Thread Steve McIntyre
[ Also posted to debian-arm; not cross-posted to avoid subscription complaints... ] Hi folks, We're currently carrying patches in glibc in Debian (and Ubuntu) that I wrote which are used to work out whether an ELF binary is hard-float or soft-float. We're using these to allow us to do the right

Re: Distinguishing SF/HF ABI binaries, take two

2012-08-02 Thread Mans Rullgard
On 2 August 2012 17:43, Steve McIntyre wrote: > [ Also posted to debian-arm; not cross-posted to avoid subscription > complaints... ] > > Hi folks, > > We're currently carrying patches in glibc in Debian (and Ubuntu) that > I wrote which are used to work out whether an ELF binary is hard-float >

Re: Distinguishing SF/HF ABI binaries, take two

2012-08-02 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 06:39:33PM +0100, Mans Rullgard wrote: >On 2 August 2012 17:43, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> [ Also posted to debian-arm; not cross-posted to avoid subscription >> complaints... ] >> >> Hi folks, >> >> We're currently carrying patches in glibc in Debian (and Ubuntu) that >> I

Re: Distinguishing SF/HF ABI binaries, take two

2012-08-02 Thread Mans Rullgard
On 2 August 2012 19:00, Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 06:39:33PM +0100, Mans Rullgard wrote: >>On 2 August 2012 17:43, Steve McIntyre wrote: >>> [ Also posted to debian-arm; not cross-posted to avoid subscription >>> complaints... ] >>> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> We're currently ca

Re: Distinguishing SF/HF ABI binaries, take two

2012-08-02 Thread Ulrich Weigand
Steve McIntyre wrote: > >> Upstream glibc have generally not been welcoming of these patches, and > >> I understand this; the approach taken (reading ARM-specific build > >> attributes) is far from clean and doesn't fit well in the design of > >> ld.so in particular. > > > >Nevertheless, the tags i

Re: Distinguishing SF/HF ABI binaries, take two

2012-08-02 Thread Mans Rullgard
On 2 August 2012 20:26, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Steve McIntyre wrote: >> >> Upstream glibc have generally not been welcoming of these patches, and >> >> I understand this; the approach taken (reading ARM-specific build >> >> attributes) is far from clean and doesn't fit well in the design of >> >>

Seeing __dso_handle link errors when building Android?

2012-08-02 Thread Michael Hope
For reference, if you see link time errors about a missing '__dso_handle' symbol when building Android, then check if you're using any global class instances in your multimedia libraries. Each shared library has a __dso_handle symbol which is filled in on load by the dynamic loader. Global class