[patch] extending/completing brandelf's OS knowledge

Alexander Leidinger Alexander at Leidinger.net
Mon Jan 25 09:01:39 UTC 2010

Quoting Doug Barton <dougb at FreeBSD.org> (from Sun, 24 Jan 2010  
21:29:42 -0800 (PST)):

> On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Kostik Belousov wrote:
>> I do not see a need for such rudimentary ELF editor in the base at all.
> So, perhaps it's time to move brandelf out of the base? And if so,  
> perhaps Alexander's contribution could be incorporated into a port  
> for it?

Personally I do not see a reason why his work can not go into the base  
system. From a feature point of view the patch is giving brandelf a  
little bit more freedom what it is allowed to change. When I look at  
what I do/did with various tools in FreeBSD which where not intended  
to be used like this but where useful in some cases, I do not think we  
should enforce the policy to allow only stuff in brandelf which we are  
able to emulate.

>> After the work of dchagin@/bz@, brandelf is needed only for the corner
>> cases, if at all.
> Hmm, I was fooling around with some linux'y stuff the other day and  
> needed to brandelf it (don't remember what, obviously wasn't that  
> important). :)
> If this happens again in the future, is it worth reporting  
> somewhere? (-emulation@ ?)

If it was to brandelf a static linux executable so that the FreeBSD  
system does not reboot when executing the static linux executable,  
then I would say it does not need to be reported and we still need  
brandelf in the base system.

If someone says that exactly this case has been fixed recently: it  
would be great to hear on emulation@ about cases where brandelf is  
still needed.


Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #217:
	 You can't free a fish from water.
		-- ST:DS9, "Past Tense, Part I"

http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137

More information about the freebsd-hackers mailing list