This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Linux-abi group
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Suprateeka R Hegde <hegdesmailbox at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, llvm-commits <llvm-commits at lists dot llvm dot org>, cfe-commits <cfe-commits at lists dot llvm dot org>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 08:25:42 -0800
- Subject: Re: Linux-abi group
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAMe9rOqPzub4Qr95JT9_U9FBtbME4Xb2ZTgqPrN-Umf70vWGbQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <87io1z2e2i dot fsf at mid dot deneb dot enyo dot de> <CAMe9rOqxZ6NDTc9pKJRpA--A_+moVNSZXyvZ0mkebx0X+LD=_g at mail dot gmail dot com> <87egcn2diz dot fsf at mid dot deneb dot enyo dot de> <CAMe9rOr6jj0ax0B=9dFpuMYCu=HJaf9a3g2-NGnvNV2ZWTqwXg at mail dot gmail dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1602082307130 dot 18645 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMe9rOqoABu=bD5tgeBQsQXWZmhd5CHSZuwfobg8ezoCmCHNGg at mail dot gmail dot com> <56BC61F0 dot 3010507 at gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOqUbo_hFin-yf7T0S43qcY=Jn8g4R7PqrS0OGVwhx4qRw at mail dot gmail dot com> <56BCB13E dot 9020807 at gmail dot com>
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:05 AM, Suprateeka R Hegde
<hegdesmailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11-Feb-2016 07:21 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 2:26 AM, Suprateeka R Hegde
>> <hegdesmailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> H.J,
>>>
>>> I think we are fragmenting with too many standards and mailing lists.
>>> This
>>> new discussion group and eventually the resulting standards, all might be
>>> put under LSB http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/lsb.shtml
>>>
>>> The Intro on LSB says:
>>>
>>> http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/elfintro.html
>>>
>>> And thats what this proposal is intended for.
>>>
>>> And we can use the LSB mailing list
>>> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-discuss for all
>>> discussions.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>
>> LSB lists extensions which have been implemented. But it isn't a spec
>> you can use to implement them. For example:
>>
>>
>> http://refspecs.linuxbase.org/LSB_3.1.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/progheader.html
>>
>> lists PT_GNU_EH_FRAME, PT_GNU_STACK and PT_GNU_RELRO.
>> But it gives no details. Linux ABI group is the place where we propose
>> extensions before they get implemented.
>
>
> How to implement, according to me, is design details of a particular
> product. It also depends on the language used to develop the product.
> Standards, in most cases, are not tied to a language and hence do not
> enforce implementation details.
>
>
That is exactly what Linux ABI group tries to address. Please see
the Linux gABI extension draft at
https://github.com/hjl-tools/linux-abi/wiki/Linux-Extensions-to-gABI
It describes the conventions and constraints on the implementa-
tion of these extensions for interoperability between various tools.
--
H.J.