MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHO+3xRtDT_kTLs3rpES2UZT0PPD+sS2H_Xi2NNj42BVEcFWgw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200327161918.4aedc0ca@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> <20200329134313.avejs4adn2r7eh35@wolfsden.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20200329134313.avejs4adn2r7eh35@wolfsden.cz>
From: Henrik Holst <henrik.holst@omnimodular.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2020 16:56:44 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHO+3xTYhix8Mt0NPA4WoXc2AF4jKTUbi1m45UGKxQvWGrwR1g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: tini-static dynamically linked
To: Wolf <wolf@wolfsden.cz>
Cc: Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>, ~alpine/users@lists.alpinelinux.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

My $0.02 is that tini-staic should be made a real static. The value
prop for PIE does not outweigh the confusion that this is causing.

/sbin # ldd tini-static
        /lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 (0x7f6a662d7000)

On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 3:43 PM Wolf <wolf@wolfsden.cz> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On 2020-03-27 16:19:18 +0100, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > The benefit with linking it as PIE (position independent executable) is
> > that it give full address space layout randomization (ASLR), even if it
> > is linked statically.
> >
> > Side effect is that is marked as ET_DYN in the elf header and looks
> > like a dynamically linked executable.
>
> but at the same time, since it "links" against the ld-musl
>
> /a # gcc -static -pie -o test test.c
> /a # ldd test
>         /lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 (0x7f63e4bc1000)
>
> such binary is not portable to non-musl systems correct? And if I want
> to achieve that, I need to compile with -no-pie flag?
>
> Is my understanding correct?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> W.
>
> --
> There are only two hard things in Computer Science:
> cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors.



-- 

Henrik Holst, Tekn. Dr.

VD och medgrundare Omnimodular AB (559050-1846)

E-post henrik.holst@omnimodular.com

Mobil +46 76 246 17 15