PATCH: Update DF_1_XXX from Solaris

[Carlos O'Donell]

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:26 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Carlos O'Donell
> <carlos@systemhalted.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:56 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Carlos O'Donell
>>> <carlos@systemhalted.org> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:39 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 2012-11-16  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         * elf.h (DF_1_NODIRECT): New macro.
>>>>>>>         (DF_1_IGNMULDEF): Likewise.
>>>>>>>         (DF_1_NOKSYMS): Likewise.
>>>>>>>         (DF_1_NOHDR): Likewise.
>>>>>>>         (DF_1_EDITED): Likewise.
>>>>>>>         (DF_1_NORELOC): Likewise.
>>>>>>>         (DF_1_SYMINTPOSE): Likewise.
>>>>>>>         (DF_1_GLOBAUDIT): Likewise.
>>>>>>>         (DF_1_SINGLETON): Likewise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is the purpose of this change?
>>>>>
>>>>> To make  DF_1_XXX macros more complete.
>>>>
>>>> In your opinion what should happen in the loader
>>>> if we have a flag set that we don't support?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I believe we currently simply ignore them.
>>
>> That's not the question I was asking though.
>> I'm asking for *your* opinion on what the loader
>> should do in the face of flags it can't honour?
>>
>
> I think we should issue an error and stop.

I agree :-)

Therefore can you amend your patch to issue an error and stop
when we find any of the flags we can't handle, including the
new ones you wish to add?

I'll review your new patch.

Cheers,
Carlos.