From owner-freebsd-current Fri Dec 19 08:21:54 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id IAA26857 for current-outgoing; Fri, 19 Dec 1997 08:21:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current) Received: from sos.freebsd.dk (sos.freebsd.dk [195.8.129.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26850 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 1997 08:21:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sos@sos.freebsd.dk) Received: (from sos@localhost) by sos.freebsd.dk (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA00325; Fri, 19 Dec 1997 17:22:24 +0100 (MET) (envelope-from sos) Message-Id: <199712191622.RAA00325@sos.freebsd.dk> Subject: Re: ELF binaries In-Reply-To: from Alex at "Dec 12, 97 08:00:44 pm" To: garbanzo@hooked.net (Alex) Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 17:22:24 +0100 (MET) Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG From: Søren Schmidt Reply-to: sos@FreeBSD.dk X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL30 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In reply to Alex who wrote: > I've seen some messages before about getting FreeBSD ELF support in the > binutils, and a recent interest in egcs got me wondering. How hard would > it be for the fbsd changes committed with the egcs stuff (so one can do > dynamic libraries with egcs), or what kind of problems would I run into if > I decided to grab a newer gnu binutils and use that? Most of the changes are allready there. Use i386-unknown-freebsd or some thing close to that... The compiler in current can be configured for ELF too... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Søren Schmidt (sos@FreeBSD.org) FreeBSD Core Team Even more code to hack -- will it ever end ..