@sebastien Thanks for your opinion. I think I need to add more information to make everyone clear about the purpose of this change.
BRs, Sebastien Lorquet <sebast...@lorquet.fr> 于2025年4月7日周一 21:39写道： > There was a lot of comments in the github and I may have missed the whole > of it. > > Your information was reassuring, I am not opposing it anymore. > > Care is being taken about this issue, that is the most important of all. > > Sebastien > > > On 07/04/2025 15:35, chao an wrote: > > @ Sebastien Lorquet > > > - breaks several build you had to fix incrementally > > However, I see a genuine concern from many members around this change, > actual tests are being made and additional required fixes have been found. > > Also communication efforts have been made beforehand. > > > This commit does not bring any side effects, because the PR has been > pending for too long, and the nutxx and apps repositories need to be > rebased. You can ask @lupyuen further, he knows the details > > > > - it fixes nothing not the name. > > This is not a simple renaming, but a matter of correcting history > (apache/nuttx#14100): > > NuttX have 2 elf implementations before, one is libelf and other one is > modlib, 90% of the code was duplicated. Modlib has more features than > libelf, including dynamic loading, so the libelf code was completely > deleted in the following commit: > apache/nuttx#14100 > but actually modlib is the implementation of elf. In this PR, I changed > the name of modlib back to libelf, so that readers can know more clearly > what the internal implementation is > > > > Also why is the commit showing the name as "ELF" and not "LIBELF"? > > The default name has been changed to libelf > > > I'm not sure why you object to this change, and I want to try to convince > you further. > > Sebastien Lorquet <sebast...@lorquet.fr> 于2025年4月7日周一 21:12写道： > >> Hello, >> >> >> This rename: >> >> - breaks several build you had to fix incrementally >> >> - it fixes nothing not the name. >> >> >> The modlib name is unfortunate but I think we can live with it. >> >> >> Also why is the commit showing the name as "ELF" and not "LIBELF"? >> >> That is not acceptable for me. Also -1. >> >> >> However, I see a genuine concern from many members around this change, >> actual tests are being made and additional required fixes have been found. >> >> Also communication efforts have been made beforehand. >> >> I am grateful for this. >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> Sebastien >> >> >> On 07/04/2025 11:13, chao an wrote: >> >> Hi community, >> >> Some green hand and individual developer who are not familiar with nuttx >> may be confused by the naming of modlib, in currect implement, modlib as an >> elf loader and parser, does not provide any features other than elf. >> >> In this pull request, I plan to rename modlib to elf, and adjust it from >> the architecture level as follows: >> >> https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/15765 >> >> >> [image: image.png] >> >> In addition from other popular operating systems, different loadable >> types are all implemented in binfmt. Therefore, it is also impossible for >> modlib to support formats other than ELF in the future: >> >> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/fs/binfmt_elf.c >> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/fs/binfmt_elf_fdpic.c >> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/fs/binfmt_flat.c >> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/fs/binfmt_misc.c >> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/fs/binfmt_script.c >> >> https://github.com/alexbousso/kernel_2.4.18-14/blob/master/fs/binfmt_coff.c >> >> This is where they belong: >> https://github.com/apache/nuttx/tree/master/binfmt >> >> >> So I need your vote here: >> If you prefer modlib, please reply with -1. >> If you recommend libelf, please reply with +1. >> >> BRs, >> >>
