Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 12:20:16 -0700 From: David Kirchner <dpk@dpk.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Which version of FreeBSD a binary was compiled for? Message-ID: <35c231bf0510271220i2fb3de62g55a80f3d06f03355@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20051027185157.GV29508@localdomain> References: <cb5206420510251524r32ddd9adx7d4fdce8f82a85be@mail.gmail.com> <17247.39311.203645.265116@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <cb5206420510260818p664df038g39a1035c747ac315@mail.gmail.com> <200510262115.48144.krinklyfig@comcast.net> <cb5206420510270116k27ad6e13r5dd17dbc7323c01f@mail.gmail.com> <4360DB59.7010900@ywave.com> <20051027154408.GS29508@localdomain> <43611E22.5030408@ywave.com> <20051027185157.GV29508@localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/27/05, Will Maier <willmaier@ml1.net> wrote: > Must be -- some flag produces unique bits in the executables. I'm a > little surprised there isn't (AFAICT) anything descriptive in > file(1)'s manpage or /u/s/mi/magic that would explain the > discrepancy. Didn't see anything in quick looks through gcc(1) or > make(1), either. > > Weird. It doesn't look like it's done in the magic file. Rather, it's something built in to file itself. Check out around line 400 of 'readelf.c'. This doesn't explain how it gets in to the binaries built, though.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?35c231bf0510271220i2fb3de62g55a80f3d06f03355>