Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:45:44 +0200 (MET DST) From: sos@FreeBSD.org To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith) Cc: sos@FreeBSD.org, msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, jdp@polstra.com, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Linux compat issue(s) Message-ID: <199610161145.NAA21933@ra.dkuug.dk> In-Reply-To: <199610161123.UAA03542@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at Oct 16, 96 08:53:30 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In reply to Michael Smith who wrote:
>
> sos@FreeBSD.org stands accused of saying:
> >
> > > Will your changes just reject an unidentifiable ELF binary out-of-hand,
> > > or could you add a sysctl variable to determine which format to
> > > presume? The latter method would be best, IMHO.
> >
> > Hmm, following the ELF style I guess default should always be native, or
> > one could argue for SVR4 compliant (which you dont have yet).
> > I'm not fond of it being variable, that will generate too much support
> > steam I'm afraid.
>
> Native would be pointless, as native binaries will always be
> identifiable. The reason I ask is that for the situation where the
NO, wrong, we can't even see if the bin is native !!!!
> Linux emulator had been loaded, but not the (hypothetical) SVR4
> emulator, you could default to Linux and not have to brand your
> binaries, and vice versa.
Hypothetical ?? I have a SVR4 emu :), I just can't/wont't release the code...
> The only situation where branding would be required would be when both
> emulations were active, and IMHO _that_ is likely to generate less
> support steam just by its rarity.
>
> One could also bias the selection based on the path of the executable,
> as that is visible in exec_elf_imgact. Anything under /compat/linux
> is likely to be a linux binary, &c &c. That would further limit the
> requirement for branding to "both emulators loaded and binary outside
> of compatability tree".
I would wote for ALWAYS branding the ELF files, that way there is
NO doubt what sex they are, thus giving least trouble.
> The last ditch "I have no idea, winging it" case could just default to
> the last interpreter in the list - that would let the user alter the
> default if there were more than one available by unloading and
> reloading the LKM.
I'd rather have it give up and say unknown binary format or something like
that, or try running it as a FreeBSD ELF bin.
Now, for a practical question, what should I call the little util ??
markelf, brandelf or just plan elf (fixelf sounds a bit harsh :) )
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Soren Schmidt (sos@FreeBSD.org) FreeBSD Core Team
So much code to hack -- so little time.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610161145.NAA21933>