https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #56 from mintsuki <mintsuki at protonmail dot com> --- (In reply to mintsuki from comment #54) > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #52) > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #51) > > > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #50) > > > > > > > > Why can't you check DF_1_PIE for PIE? > > > > > > > > That is what I do now, but to check for *relocatability*. PIE in and of > > > > itself is not something that tells me whether I should relocate (for > > > > KASLR > > > > for example) or not. That is what you just said. > > > > > > If DF_1_PIE is set, the binary can be relocated to any address. What did I > > > miss? > > > > The first PT_LOAD segment has non-0 p_vaddr, the program may misbehave if > > the load address != p_vaddr. > > How is this possible? Under which circumstances? It works fine with all the > other linkers for me. And it has always worked fine when I simply checked DF_1_PIE and relocated to different addresses regardless of the ELF type. The only difference between 0 and non-0 base is that ld.bfd decides to force the ELF type to ET_EXEC, and nothing more. I do not care about what Linux does, nor what glibc does; this is purely between me and the linker, what some specific OS or ELF loader does should not be of any concern to me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
