You cannot post messages because only members can post, and you are not currently a member.
Description:
Discuss modification and extension of generic System V Application Binary Interface.
|
|
|
Add STB_SECONDARY to gABI
|
| |
Here is the final proposal to add STB_SECONDARY to gABI.
Any comments?
Thanks.
-- H.J.
---
We want to provide a relocatable object which can take advantage of all
versions of a supported OS. For a function, foo, in the C library, we
can use it only if it is available on all versions of the C library or... more »
|
|
Absolute symbols
|
| |
I started of writing the following as a comment in binutils PR14502,
then decided it may be worth airing this to a wider audience.
Absolute symbols in an executable or shared library should be treated
no differently to any other symbol. If a binary is relocated by a
given amount, so should all symbols defined by the binary. The ELF... more »
|
|
RFC: Add STB_SECONDARY
|
| |
We want to provide a relocatable object which can take advantage of
all
versions of a supported OS. For a function, foo, in the C library, we
can use it only if it is available on all versions of the C library or
we provide our own implementation of foo. With our own foo, the one
in
the C library will never be used. Here is a proposal to add... more »
|
|
Link with mixed IR/non-IR objects
|
| |
Here is a proposal to link with mixed IR/non-IR objects:
* 2 kinds of object files
o non-IR object file has
* non-IR sections
o IR object file has
* IR sections
* non-IR sections
* The output of "ld -r" with mixed IR/non-IR objects should work
with:
o Compilers/linkers with IR support.... more »
|
|
EM code allocation for Open8 MCU
|
| |
I would like to request an EM "e_machine" code allocation (as used in binutils/include/elf/common.h) for the "Open8 8-bit RISC soft processor core" (documented at [link] ). Request that the value be called "EM_OPEN8", if possible. Kindest, Kirk I. Hays (Above message also sent to regis...@sco.com)... more »
|
|
ELF number for SHARC processors
|
| |
Is there a number allocated for Analog Devices' SHARC processors? I
was under the impression that 133 had been allocated as EM_SHARC some
years ago (probably when 106 was allocated as EM_BLACKFIN), but I
might have incorrect information on that front.
If there isn't one, could one be allocated, please?... more »
|
|
|