[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <73a01bf20910261059j74bb37a9td472efc21c5440ca@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:59:22 -0500
From: Rayson Ho <raysonlogin@...il.com>
To: "Anton D. Kachalov" <mouse@...c.ru>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: FatELF & patents
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Anton D. Kachalov <mouse@...c.ru> wrote:
> Hmm... looks like patents talks about objects that stored in one file with
> arch-independent header.
Actually, the example in the PDF is an executable.
> My implementation (that is differ to Ryan's) do not use any headers except
> ELF header and just 3 bytes in it to store next location. So, it's patent
> clear.
However, there are 20 claims in the patent. Just using a different way
to store the architecture independent header might not be enough.
> This is very common way to store different arch binaries...
The patent mentions only one prior art:
"One prior art attempt to provide a method for providing a single
application for a variety of architectures and formats is the ANDF
system, developed by OSF. This is an architecture neutral binary
format. A disadvantage of this scheme is that it requires conversion
to the native architecture at installation time."
I don't think there is anything similar to Apple's fat binary or
universal binary -- a single executable that can be executed on
different processor families.
The closest thing I can think of is the mixed of 32-bit / 64-bit
object files in a single archive on AIX.
> PS. Patents is evil.
Hence the heads up.
And yes, thanks but no thanks, I won't need an iPhone!!
Rayson
>
> Rgds,
> Anton
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists