[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Binutils fixed to deal with 'insmod' issue and discussion...

To: "Steven J. Hill" <>
Subject: Re: Binutils fixed to deal with 'insmod' issue and discussion...
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 13:35:10 +0200 (MET DST)
In-reply-to: <>
Organization: Technical University of Gdansk
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Steven J. Hill wrote:

> Well, the traditional MIPS targets are BEING used for SVR4....observe:
> ld/configure.tgt:286:    mips*-*-sysv4*) targ_emul=elf32btsmip ;;
>  gas/conlfigure:2499:    mips-*-sysv4*MP*) fmt=elf em=tmips ;;
>    bfd/    mips*-*-sysv4*) targ_defvec=bfd_elf32_tradbigmips_vec

 Yep, I know.

> I think that using 'elf[32|64]_[big|little]mips' for Linux and SVR4 would
> be a bad idea and would confuse things. Note that in 'bfd/elf32-mips.c' the
> IRIX_COMPAT macro is hinged around checking for a traditional MIPS target
> and will proceed to build IRIX flavored binaries if we are not using a
> traditional target. The names for IRIX targets ARE currently
> 'elf[32|64]_[big|little]mips'. Changing binutils so that these targets will
> now be for Linux/SVR4 and create ANOTHER target 'elf[32|64]_irixbigmips'
> will add more bloat to binutils and be confusing to people. SVR4 already
> uses traditional MIPS targets and Linux should as well. My vote is still
> to make Linux use the traditional MIPS targets. It will be difficult to
> convince me otherwise right now :).

 Note that 'elf32_tradbigmips' is quite a recent invention.  I was
thinking of making SVR4 use 'elf32_bigmips', as well, as this is *THE*
MIPS ELF target and others are variations.  Getting it otherwise seems
backwards.  It's a minor purity issue anyway, so even though I like my
idea better I don't absolutely insist on it. 

 Thanks for getting the work off from me, BTW.  I was going to make the
fix for quite some time now, but given my recent time constraints I
couldn't assure any reasonable deadline for it. :-(

+  Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland   +
+        e-mail:, PGP key available        +

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>