Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 12 Feb 1997 09:35:02 +1030 (CST)
From:      Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
To:        terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert)
Cc:        msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, terry@lambert.org, swallace@ece.uci.edu, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: linux ELF codine no go on 2.2 Gamma
Message-ID:  <199702112305.JAA07951@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
In-Reply-To: <199702112249.PAA29180@phaeton.artisoft.com> from Terry Lambert at "Feb 11, 97 03:49:49 pm"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert stands accused of saying:
> > In an ideal world, this would be nice.  Reality ain't quite like that
> > though; there are, and will continute to be for some time, commercial
> > ELF binaries out there that _aren't_ branded, and in some cases
> > branding them is impractical (there are lots of them scattered around
> > inside a product) or impossible (the product resists tampering by
> > employing a self-validation process).
> 
> #define	UNBRANDED_ELF	SVR4_ABI

#define	UNBRANDED_ELF	SVR4_ABI|COMMERCIAL_LINUX

> You do not need to brand commercial ELF binaries, unless they are from
> Linux.  If they are from Linux, brand them this time, and expect them
> to use the updated tools (and come branded) next release.

... and you are ignoring me again.  Branding them when you get them is a 
REAL PAIN IN THE ASS, and there is no guarantee that they'll be any
better next time.  (Do you actually have to deal with commercial outfits
doing code for Linux?  I wot not.)  

As for "updated tools", you read the glibc 2.0 announcement posted here
a while back, no?  You read the part where they're moving _closer_ to
the SVr4 ABI and using the same linker path, ie. making it
_harder_ to tell the two apart?

> If they are FreeBSD ELF binaries, I'd be interested in acquiring

Oh _please_, at least take the few seconds to _read_ my messages 8(

> > Using the path of an executable won't _hurt_ anything, and in the case
> > of stuff that's installed under the 'compat' tree will just magically
> > DTRT.
> 
> Assuming your path "magically" includes compat/* as a prefix for each
> and every path component.  Not otherwise, however.

Na und?  "Install all your Linux stuff in /compat/linux" is a much
easier instruction to follow than "Find all the ELF binaries in every
Linux package you install and execute this command on each of them".

> What other ELF binaries, not fixed in the next release, are unbranded
> non-SVR4-EABI ELF binaries?

All of the current Linux ones, many of which will be in use for not
inconsiderable periods of time, and a good many of the upcoming Linux
ones which will be produced by commercial software houses that _aren't_
going to be following the bleeding edge of Linux 'development'.

Look: dump the hair shirt and accept that in the short term this is a
prudent step that will help to reduce by some degree the stress of
dealing with people that are trying to do "real" work with the system.

> 					Terry Lambert

-- 
]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer        msmith@gsoft.com.au             [[
]] Genesis Software                     genesis@gsoft.com.au            [[
]] High-speed data acquisition and      (GSM mobile)     0411-222-496   [[
]] realtime instrument control.         (ph)          +61-8-8267-3493   [[
]] Unix hardware collector.             "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick  [[



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702112305.JAA07951>