On 01/20/2017 11:55 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> We can classify properties into 2 categories: used by run-time loader,
> not used by run-time loader. We put properties for run-time loader into
> .note.gnu.property section and the rest into GNU attribute section.
Agreed.
Can we use the same noun/adjecti
On 01/18/2017 12:02 PM, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Carlos,
>
>> I've added 2 questions to the Toolchain/Watermark wiki but will post them
>> here for posterity:
>
> Thanks - I'll try answering them here first, and if my answers make sense
> then I will update the wiki.
>
>> (1) What happened to SH
Hi Carlos,
> I've added 2 questions to the Toolchain/Watermark wiki but will post them
> here for posterity:
Thanks - I'll try answering them here first, and if my answers make sense
then I will update the wiki.
> (1) What happened to SHT_GNU_ATTRIBUTES and how does it relate to what
> you
On 01/16/2017 09:37 AM, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi H.J.
>
>> We have 2 different proposals for program properties. Mine:
>>
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gnu-gabi/2016-q4/msg00025.html
>>
>> has a much smaller scope. New features on upcoming Intel platforms,
>> like 5-level paging, need this extens
Hi H.J.
> We have 2 different proposals for program properties. Mine:
>
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gnu-gabi/2016-q4/msg00025.html
>
> has a much smaller scope. New features on upcoming Intel platforms,
> like 5-level paging, need this extension for loader decision at run-time.
> How should we
Nick Clifton writes:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> We (the tools team at Red Hat) are working on a project to add
> annotations to ELF binaries, so that we can answer various questions
> about them. We have set up a wiki page about the project here:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Toolchain/Wat
On 11/07/2016 07:00 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Sun, 6 Nov 2016, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
The only sensible way to write the psABI is for it to say "this is how
to pass an 80 or 128 bit floating point value." The psABI can't say
I would advise using IEEE 754-2008 names in psABIs where availabl
On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 03:28:12PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 11/04/2016 07:34 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> >Also the hardening stuff often doesn't apply in safe languages, so the
> >tools you build around this shouldn't automatically assume
> >no hardening == bad; or that 'long double
On 11/04/2016 07:34 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Also the hardening stuff often doesn't apply in safe languages, so the
tools you build around this shouldn't automatically assume
no hardening == bad; or that 'long double' or 'wchar_t' are meaningful.
Sorry, this isn't true. As long as you do
On 11/05/2016 12:57 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:02 AM, Nick Clifton wrote:
We (the tools team at Red Hat) are working on a project to add
annotations to ELF binaries, so that we can answer various questions
about them. We have set up a wiki page about the projec
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 03:02:22PM +, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> We (the tools team at Red Hat) are working on a project to add
> annotations to ELF binaries, so that we can answer various questions
> about them. We have set up a wiki page about the project here:
>
> htt
Hi Tristan,
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Toolchain/Watermark#Markup_for_ELF_objects
> This will generalise attributes used by some architectures (ppc, arm), won't
> it ?
Yes. Or at least it would if implemented as currently proposed. Maybe a better
solution would be to only record attrib
Hello Everyone,
We (the tools team at Red Hat) are working on a project to add
annotations to ELF binaries, so that we can answer various questions
about them. We have set up a wiki page about the project here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Toolchain/Watermark#Markup_for_ELF_objects
We
13 matches
Mail list logo
