This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Add ARM relocation constants to elf/elf.h

"Joseph S. Myers" <> writes:

> On Thu, 24 Jan 2013, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> "Joseph S. Myers" <> writes:
>> > I'm not clear there is a great deal of use in having all these relocations 
>> > (that are irrelevant to in elf.h; what are the expected users, 
>> elf.h is an installed headers, so everyone can use it.
> But who does?  There are huge numbers of definitions in binutils that 
> aren't in glibc's elf.h - perhaps we need a way to share things more 
> systematically between the two?

E.g. elfutils are a consumer of elf.h (they ship a custom copy of elf.h,
but the one from glibc is considered upstream).  If there is any effort
to finish the elfutils linker (not that there is any incentive, really,
now that gold came along), that would need ARM relocation names as well.
The example of GCL shows that you never know who ends up needing what.
To me, that illustrates that elf.h should be as complete as possible.

Whether there is a need to share more with binutils I haven't thought
about.  It probably makes sense.  Binutils are considered upstream of
the factual Elf-related changes, so it might as well be considered
upstream of their C language renditions.  How practical it would be I
have no idea.  At least some parts of their header files would be easily


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]