From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Oct 15 14:28:47 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA09868 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 14:28:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA09860; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 14:28:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id OAA01611; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 14:28:03 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199610152128.OAA01611@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Linux compat issue(s) To: sos@FreeBSD.org Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 14:28:03 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, hackers@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <199610152041.WAA02300@SandBox.CyberCity.dk> from "sos@FreeBSD.org" at Oct 15, 96 10:41:18 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > How come that took so long Terry ?? Heh. Instantly isn't fast enough for you? ;-). > So do we in the dynamically linked case, almost all ELF implemetations > on the x86 platform use different named/located interpreters. > It is only the statically linked binaries that is the problem. > Linux has the same problems we do, they have implemented another=20 > hack than the one I suggest, just their method isn't very robust > but they're used to that, right :) ELF has a general problem with binary type recognition. One way would be to steal codes from CPU type and distinguish with magic number, or vice versa. It should also be noted that it's kind of silly to follow the SVR4 EABI if you don't have the same trap entry points (ie: reallly follow it). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.