From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id PAA17039; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 15:05:05 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA16955 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 15:05:04 +0100 (MET) Received: from cantina.students.cs.unibo.it (cantina.students.cs.unibo.it [130.136.3.110]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g0OE52509568 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 15:05:03 +0100 (MET) Received: from lordsoth.takhisis.org ([130.136.32.178]) (authenticated (0 bits)) by cantina.students.cs.unibo.it (8.12.0.Beta19/8.12.0.Beta19/Debian 8.12.0.Beta19) with ESMTP id g0OE4u9l024869 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=192 verify=FAIL); Thu, 24 Jan 2002 15:04:58 +0100 Received: from lordsoth.takhisis.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lordsoth.takhisis.org (8.12.0/8.12.0/Debian -3) with ESMTP id g0OE4lAA003143 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL); Thu, 24 Jan 2002 15:04:47 +0100 Received: (from zack@localhost) by lordsoth.takhisis.org (8.12.0/8.12.0/Debian -3) id g0OE4lnj003141; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 15:04:47 +0100 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 15:04:47 +0100 From: Stefano Zacchiroli To: Inria Ocaml Mailing List Cc: Robert Bihlmeyer Subject: [Caml-list] Does ocaml bytecodes linked in custom mode violate ELF std? Message-ID: <20020124140447.GA3075@cs.unibo.it> Mail-Followup-To: Inria Ocaml Mailing List , Robert Bihlmeyer References: <20020118160419.GA6647@cs.unibo.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020118160419.GA6647@cs.unibo.it> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk I received a third part opinion (i.e. not a camlers) from Robert Bihlmeyer (cc: in this mail, so please keep he in the cc: list) about the ocaml bytecode executable linked in custom mode. I report his opinion below, in his opinion that kind of executables violate the ELF standard. > After some careful analysis of mldvi I have come to the conclusion > that this file violates the ELF standard. Specifically it seems to > contain additional data that is not mentioned in any one of the ELF > indices. It's no wonder that most of the GNU binutils will silently > drop this additional data (strip being the one in question, but a > no-op "objcopy mldvi mldvi2" will also remove it). I think binutils > are doing the right thing here. > > What the ocaml compiler should do is not just tag data onto the end of > the file but put it into a proper ELF section. Either an existing one > (e.g. ".data") or a new one (e.g. "bytecode"). Using the BFD library > that should not be that hard, and it's true to the extensible spirit > of ELF. Who wants to answer to these observations? TIA, Cheers. -- Stefano "Zack" Zacchiroli ICQ# 33538863 Home Page: http://www.cs.unibo.it/~zacchiro Undergraduate student of Computer Science @ University of Bologna, Italy - Information wants to be Open - ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr