This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH/RFA] Mark arm-*-netbsdelf* binaries as ELFOSABI_NETBSD

> On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 11:11, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > For a fully conforming ARM EABI implementation, this information will be 
> > determined by looking at EF_ARM_EABI_VERSION (the top 8 bits of the 
> > EF_FLAGS field).  So there's no need to mandate the setting of the 
> > ELFOSABI field.
> But the EI_OSABI field is what you look at in the first instance to
> decide whether what you're dealing with is a fully-conforming ARM EABI
> implementation.  If it is set to some strange value, you can't ascribe
> any meaning at all to EF_FLAGS.

I can't find anything in the ELF spec that says that the E_FLAGS must be 
interpreted in the light of EI_OSABI field, rather than the reverse.

I'll discuss this with Lee.

> > BTW, who allocated ELFOSABI_ARM?  I'm fairly certain it wouldn't have been 
> > ARM, 
> It certainly wasn't ARM, and I don't think ELFOSABI_ARM was ever
> codified by SCO either.  I don't remember who exactly made the choice of
> 97 as a value -- it might have been Nick, Uli, Pat, Scott or possibly
> even me -- but at any rate it was just a GNU thing.

Grr... ;-)


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]