please note: i've submitted a pr including the patch and a reference to this
thread.
the pr is bin/143699.
cheers.
alex
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail
so it seems some people consider the patch a useful extension to brandelf and
other would like brandelf to keep it's core functionality.
also some people would like brandelf to move from base to ports.
alex
Alexander Leidinger schrieb am 2010-01-25:
> Quoting Kostik Belousov (from Mon, 25 Jan 2
Quoting Kostik Belousov (from Mon, 25 Jan 2010
11:16:25 +0200):
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:01:29AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
If it was to brandelf a static linux executable so that the FreeBSD
system does not reboot when executing the static linux executable,
then I would say it do
Quoting Doug Barton (from Sun, 24 Jan 2010
21:29:42 -0800 (PST)):
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Kostik Belousov wrote:
I do not see a need for such rudimentary ELF editor in the base at all.
So, perhaps it's time to move brandelf out of the base? And if so,
perhaps Alexander's contribution could
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 11:16:25AM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> If static linux binary contains .note.ABI-tag section, and I believe
> that relatively modern binaries do, then brand is autodetected.
"Relatively modern" means by default anything using glibc. Also a bunch
of newer libc5 versions,
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:01:29AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> Quoting Doug Barton (from Sun, 24 Jan 2010
> 21:29:42 -0800 (PST)):
>
> >On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> >
> >>I do not see a need for such rudimentary ELF editor in the base at all.
> >
> >So, perhaps it's tim
Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 01:07:44PM +0100, Alexander Best wrote:
patch is pretty self explanatory i guess. brandelf should now be able to
handle all OSes defined in the current SCO elf specs (26.10.2009).
[...]
#defineELFOSABI_STANDALONE 255 /* Stan
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Kostik Belousov wrote:
I do not see a need for such rudimentary ELF editor in the base at all.
So, perhaps it's time to move brandelf out of the base? And if so, perhaps
Alexander's contribution could be incorporated into a port for it?
After the work of dchagin@/bz@,
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 03:38:08PM +0100, Alexander Best wrote:
> oh. i thought brandelf's purpose was to adjust an executable's OS ABI on a
> general basis. an example would be having solaris executables with the OS ABI
> set to 0. although freebsd won't support running these binaries brandelf cou
oh. i thought brandelf's purpose was to adjust an executable's OS ABI on a
general basis. an example would be having solaris executables with the OS ABI
set to 0. although freebsd won't support running these binaries brandelf could
be used to correct the OS ABI value which might come in handy if yo
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 01:07:44PM +0100, Alexander Best wrote:
> patch is pretty self explanatory i guess. brandelf should now be able to
> handle all OSes defined in the current SCO elf specs (26.10.2009).
>
> cheers.
> alex
> Index: usr.bin/brandelf/brandelf.1
> ===
patch is pretty self explanatory i guess. brandelf should now be able to
handle all OSes defined in the current SCO elf specs (26.10.2009).
cheers.
alex
Index: usr.bin/brandelf/brandelf.1
===
--- usr.bin/brandelf/brandelf.1 (revision
12 matches
Mail list logo
