Hi Stuart, Blows me away that it is a script! Hadn't occurred to me yet. You just saved me a lot of head scratching. Nikolay Sturm just warned me too, after you did.
The compat_linux man page sucked me in... And I wasn't paranoid enough... :-) So, there is a whole new story to follow. What I found out further is that the script for ldd does not work correctly under the OpenBSD "sh", and the error message is swallowed by diverting it "2> /dev/null", inside the script. So I would get nothing. I guess one has to set up one's path to pass first through the various bin, usr, sbin directories of the linux shadow tree so that you get a linux sh where needed. Many thanks for the tip off. Austin On Mon, 11 May 2009, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2009-05-11, Austin Hook <aus...@computershop.ca> wrote: > > Wondering if I am missing a point. Having added the package fedora_base > > and looking in /emul/linux/usr/bin I can find what I presume is the linux > > version of ldd. > > > > I can't seem to get that version of ldd to report any dependencies from > > any linux file I can find on the net. Perhaps I am just unlucky and > > finding only fully statically linked Linux binaries. But, in fact, it > > doesn't even give me an error when applying it to a pdf file or something > > else that is non-executable. > > > > Could someone point me to a location on the web of Linux binary that will > > report something other than null when queried by that version of ldd? > > > > Using 4.5 CD release version on a Acer Aspire 1, (Intel Atom) > > > > Austin > > > > > > /emul/linux/usr/bin/ldd is a shell script, which in the simple case > ends up calling this: > > /emul/linux/usr/bin/ld-2.3.6-elf.so --verify <file> > > as you can see if you try it manually, this results in: > > Abort trap > > I could be wildly wrong, but I *think* this means we don't emulate one > of the system calls that it needs.
