Re: [Patch] sh64: Fix gas testsuite expected output

[Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>]

On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Alan Modra wrote:
> > I believe the real test for a change in OSABI or ABIVERSION is:
> > Will a consumer of ELF files, such as a linker, that properly handles
> > ELF files conforming to the gABI and relevant psABI, be able to
> > properly handle your particular ELF files?
> As said many times, yes, this is the only use for this field.  All other
> marking of an ELF file must be done with other means and the method
> agreed on a looong time ago is a special note segment.

Sure, a .note section with identifying contents for a linked
object, but that doesn't solve it for a REL (meaning non-linked)
object.

Or perhaps you didn't really mean the .note section?

Suggestion: for REL (still meaning unlinked) objects have an
empty section with a special name (keyed on machine-name and
vendor name, like GNU as in GNU binutils, and on function) in
each unlinked object, e.g.
 .SH.GNU.abi.gnulinux
 .SH.GNU.abi.standalone
 .SH.GNU.abi.netbsd
(Names TBD; just examples.)  Caveat: it doesn't solve the
ambiguity for existing objects.  I think we can live with that,
if objects without such a section are treated as compatible with
whatever context they are used in.  This should keep backward
compatibility, and above all, old tools won't hork when they see
"new" objects.

Thoughts?

brgds, H-P