[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK4o1WyuKB=TJ9VQEq=xmcQ_LnErkqQMLyLRkv9TqvZe1Jb4ug@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 17:59:57 +0000
From: Justin Cormack <justin@...cialbusservice.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: How can I assess compatibility of a statically linked binary?
On 20 Feb 2014 17:51, "Oliver Schneider" <musl-mailinglist@...rot.com>
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> when I have a file linked against glibc the file(1) utility will usually
> tell me something like this:
>
> ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked
> (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.15, stripped
>
> However, when I run this on a statically linked binary that uses musl, I
> get
>
> ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked,
> stripped
>
> which gives no indication of the minimum expected kernel. Does that mean
> that this binary will also run on, say, a 2.4.x kernel? I guess not?
>
> How can I tell which kernel interface a certain binary requires? After
> all the system call numbers on which the libc relies change every once
> in a while.
>
The Musl docs say which the earliest supported release is. From memory it
is late 2.4 but I don't recall the exact version. If you don't use some
functionality things might work on an earlier version of course.
Justin
Content of type "text/html" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
