Re: QNX binutils targets

["H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 01:13:07PM -0400, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Graeme Peterson wrote:
> 
> > Hi, all.
> >
> > I am in the process of adding the ELFOSABI_QNX.  I have some questions and
> > concerns.
> >
> > - How will changing the OSABI and bfd names affect our existing tools
> >   (gcc, gdb, etc...) that use the generic ones?
> 
> I think there will be breakage, perhaps total incompatibility.

That is the direct result of that QNX uses a different ABI. That is
what EI_OSABI is designed for.

> Consider instead creating a special-named section, as proposed
> in <URL:http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2002-10/msg00454.html>.

You have no ideas what you are talking about.

> 
> > - My current approach is to add the define in include/elf/common.h:
> >   #define ELFOSABI_QNX     13     /* QNX Neutrino */
> 
> If you follow the binutils list, you should know that H.J.:s
> proposal to change ELFOSABI for this purpose is doubtful.
> 
> See for example
> <URL:http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2002-10/msg00434.html>,
> links and follow-ups in/to that message.

You totally missed the boat. EI_OSABI is for linker and .note.ABI-tag
is for OS. Please see

http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2002-10/msg00436.html

BTW, Ulrich and I were therre when we, people who are responsible
for gABI and psABI/ia64, aka ELF, discussed how EI_OSABI should be
used. Before you mislead anyone again, please read

http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2000-11/msg00383.html


H.J.


H.J.