|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

The ABI status of ELF hash tables

The ABI status of ELF hash tables

Posted Aug 19, 2022 15:21 UTC (Fri) by fratti (guest, #105722)
Parent article: The ABI status of ELF hash tables

I'm surprised EAC runs on Linux at all, last I heard that was a blocker for many games on the Steam Deck. Though I'm glad game developers are still engaging in the Sisyphean task of trying to establish trust on an untrusted client. The hours spent playing cat-and-mouse with zit-adorned teenagers who are telling a game server that they can in fact fly through the air seem well invested.

On a more serious note, is there any reason why glibc shouldn't keep DT_HASH around? kilobytes in disk space are hardly a reason to break an application that users are running, even if said application is not one the glibc maintainers like.

> [...] something needs to be done to solve this problem and save gamers from the prospect of having to get some actual work done.

While it may seem silly, there is a large industry of online content creators for whom playing video games is an integral part of work. Besides, we must be wary of glibc maintainers. First they came for Flash Player's use of memcpy, but I did not speak for I was not trying to watch the youtubes. Next, they came for gamers, and I did not speak for I was not a gamer. Once they come for people who spend too much time reading e-mails, there will be no one left to speak for us.


to post comments

The ABI status of ELF hash tables

Posted Aug 19, 2022 20:55 UTC (Fri) by etra0 (guest, #160378) [Link] (3 responses)

> On a more serious note, is there any reason why glibc shouldn't keep DT_HASH around? kilobytes in disk space are hardly a reason to break an application that users are running, even if said application is not one the glibc maintainers like.

So far the only two reasons I've read are
* People should have been aware of an *new* existing technology, albeit not being documented.
* You save 1% of disk space, "(...) which is considerable for an unused feature." [1]

I'm surprised how anyone would consider 1% of disk space considerable in modern day and age.

[1] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29456#c9

The ABI status of ELF hash tables

Posted Aug 20, 2022 13:33 UTC (Sat) by mid-kid (guest, #160386) [Link] (1 responses)

Saving space with the most core library of them all still makes sense in 2022 as it's used in containers (where this matters a bunch), and (even if more seldomly) embedded systems.

The ABI status of ELF hash tables

Posted Sep 1, 2022 19:43 UTC (Thu) by Vipketsh (guest, #134480) [Link]

Surely you jest. You are also complaining to all those new fangled static-link only languages for wasting your disk space, right ?

On my raspberry, which still has the DT_HASH entry, the section is less than 16kb. So, the glibc developers decided that compatibility is just not worth 16kb, in an otherwise 2mb big binary. It's not like the developers need to put in work just to keep backwards compatibility -- it's just an option to an external program for crying out loud!

It's very elitist how the glibc developers are handling this case.

The ABI status of ELF hash tables

Posted Aug 25, 2022 4:47 UTC (Thu) by milesrout (subscriber, #126894) [Link]

The bigger that my disk is, the bigger 1% is. Of course 1% disk space is still appreciable in the modern age.


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds