This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] allow easier overriding of ELF_DYNAMIC_INTERPRETER
- From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>
- To: David O'Brien <obrien at FreeBSD dot org>
- Cc: Nick Clifton <nickc at cambridge dot redhat dot com>, GNU Binutils mailing list <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 04:05:48 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] allow easier overriding of ELF_DYNAMIC_INTERPRETER
On Sun, 17 Feb 2002, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 08:35:47PM +0000, Nick Clifton wrote:
> > > If so that still will not allow easy overriding of
> > > ELF_DYNAMIC_INTERPRETER. How about we just move that macro into its
> > > own header? It would be very easy to provide an alternate header
> > > via ``configure''.
> > OK - that seems reasonable.
> This is the basic patch I have to do this. In general, does this look
> OK? Are there issues with the length of the header file names?
I don't like this.
Why treat overrides of ELF_DYNAMIC_INTERPRETER specially?
(Overriding it at all is questionable, but perhaps a separate
issue.) And when you actually do need to override stuff, what's
wrong with the #ifndef approach: having a new file, defining
stuff and including the original file, like is used in
elf32-sh-lin.c? Can someone explain? Why add some new
mechanism for generalization needlessly and for what seems a
thought-up reason, when there is a mechanism that works and
isn't too ugly?