From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 9e6a6457 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 22:54:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 2CD4F9B87B; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 08:54:23 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 759D39B841; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 08:54:05 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="gBdZXEax"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 110069B841; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 08:54:03 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-ot1-f54.google.com (mail-ot1-f54.google.com [209.85.210.54]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9A269B804 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 08:54:02 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ot1-f54.google.com with SMTP id h9so10615998otj.11 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:54:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=5nNnnjG3XSWcKt83tPgttW5TSpke5KMXmFoYXy5EJzk=; b=gBdZXEaxGJeMxGo61eOw/u1Wl8AMpLp3R2LxQ/ZbtWdSHmj+8ltb1gtW1N9+SCHzRK Ke/dDfuiMauSf5I7rZ3RwXw5wPbAfdfLsiAls6+Kw13PvPTGuiLCcgxVdPB5ApjnCmXe kWoDo0P/9ygZbQw06R4mCRIlaWyE5TkpE/QeO85Xerf9RikaO91USwHixz1Yv+Qei6wE RqIk01TfGTi8waIx4ZAEZKqT6AbQGvmXLkm5C++s42CX+GNGk+OO6Gm8jlVWtjJX/hin ywuB2Qhg9gYZVl/RW1mIpjN2PZXJICGufwlIykN4qTA/Rctd0rqvBDZpd6AsYvTZ3m0q 1vIg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5nNnnjG3XSWcKt83tPgttW5TSpke5KMXmFoYXy5EJzk=; b=DCp28sv9TMA9LOMyTELlPY+lBEnESoNs26a/znYOTft38RBMS/iyqJ5Js+eWY177wO fidPP0/u8CGQpI91SAfNFcCytFNpOXMYKop3i5benc+/bgBdl7llIc7TzUmaF5wlxWAa /6LUw49NlW5mwxzSBKDUI/caAE0IrHrpWdQHHvxfhSSZsURWTakOjoBoIzW9jZgM6uVF e+NcOxaugyekfAHp+Jbx5wwKyltNkzIsPpOaIaup0aSJGOfoC8MQchkF0wobCoaLmryw 4g+iRHVHPM1shqwrFAh32/Pi9gw0rkZTfsGeCSv6VV9KTt8WCPkqI7ABwYBO2tWXINnV g4Rg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU4fHh6oY51FtwGEn6sj447IDF9PBNT3yOAsVCkgaCLwCChlAJ1 +zsYSzVebcEzuvoYDO6ksOcBwh72hzpZTvd9yVs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw7eZgKZyTl2VDwYW/j6270OZDZC+7HR5pG2TSSO7MZVuY1VJ0agJ+RPYaXJUNDKX9zmP+cCiAhwmaony1x8OA= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:3a66:: with SMTP id j93mr15268263otc.25.1578956042036; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:54:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Henry Bent Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 17:53:48 -0500 Message-ID: To: Paul Winalski Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000067f0059c0d5ae5" Subject: Re: [TUHS] History of symbol preemption X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society , Rico Pajarola Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --0000000000000067f0059c0d5ae5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 16:43, Paul Winalski wrote: > > > Now my memory is a little hazy... I think OSF/1-386 used MachO > originally, > > but I've forgotten. Switching the kernel to use ELF was one of the > > differences between OSF1 and Tru64 IIRC. > > GEM never had to support Mach-O on any of its target platforms. DEC's > Unix on MIPS used COFF. Tru64 used ELF exclusively. I don't know > what Apple used for object files before OS X. IIRC NeXT was based on > the CMU MACH microkernel and hence used Mach-O. OS X is > FreeBSD-based, but it uses Mach-O. > OSF/1 on MIPS used ECOFF by default, but at least some versions could also create and run ELF executables. That was all early to mid 1992, I believe. I don't have my DECstation up right now to check but I'm sure that the OSF/1 2.0 beta can do it, and I wouldn't be surprised if the versions of 1.0 with the v3.0 compiler could also do it. I remember trying to do ELF shared libraries but I think that support wasn't ready yet, which is a shame because the ECOFF shared libraries on that platform are not fun to deal with. Not as bad as SGI's ECOFF shared libraries on IRIX 4 though. I'm not sure if anyone outside of SGI ever bothered to put in the work required to make one. Wasn't OSF's original intent to use the OSF/ROSE object format? -Henry --0000000000000067f0059c0d5ae5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 16:43, Paul Winals= ki <paul.winalski@gmail.com> wrote:

> Now my memory is a little hazy... I think OSF/1-386 used MachO origina= lly,
> but I've forgotten.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Switching the kernel to use ELF wa= s one of the
> differences between OSF1 and Tru64 IIRC.

GEM never had to support Mach-O on any of its target platforms.=C2=A0 DEC&#= 39;s
Unix on MIPS used COFF.=C2=A0 Tru64 used ELF exclusively.=C2=A0 I don't= know
what Apple used for object files before OS X.=C2=A0 IIRC NeXT was based on<= br> the CMU MACH microkernel and hence used Mach-O.=C2=A0 OS X is
FreeBSD-based, but it uses Mach-O.



--0000000000000067f0059c0d5ae5--