Re: [patch/rfc] New (!) BFD target

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 01:08:47AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >Also, how does this interact with the "exec" target, whose
> >functionality it seems to duplicate in some ways?  There should be an
> >exec target down the stack somewhere, why aren't you using that?
> 
> bfd-target.h is "new" and "re-entrant".  "exec.c" is "old" and "very 
> very non-re-entrant".  Recall that I wrote:
> 
> >What you're casually dismissing as trivial: "Not everywhere will need to 
> >be converted" and "Eventually, with low urgency, the non-ops should be 
> >moved out of it" are exactly the things I also need *now*.
> 
> The change I posted, for svr4-solib.o, requires two active bfd-backed 
> targets (the executable and ld.so), and hence re-entrency[sp].
> 
> Follow on changes can see "corefile.c" and "exec.c" both overhauled to 
> use this new bfd-target foundation/parent object.

OK, as commonized code between corefile and exec handling this makes a
bit more sense to me.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer