| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 20:28:27 +0000 From: Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: FatELF patches... David Hagood <david.hagood@...il.com> writes: > On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 22:19 -0400, Ryan C. Gordon wrote: >> Having heard a bunch of commentary, and made a bunch of changes based on >> some really good feedback, here are my hopefully-final FatELF patches. > > I hope it's not too late for a request for consideration: if we start > having fat binaries, could one of the "binaries" be one of the "not > quite compiled code" formats like Architecture Neutral Distribution > Format (ANDF), such that, given a fat binary which does NOT support a > given CPU, you could at least in theory process the ANDF section to > create the needed target binary? Bonus points for being able to then > append the newly created section to the file. Am I the only one who sees this as nothing bloat for its own sake? Did I miss a massive drop in intelligence of Linux users, causing them to no longer be capable of picking the correct file themselves? > As an embedded systems guy who is looking to have to support multiple > CPU types, this is really very interesting to me. As an embedded systems guy, I'm more concerned about precious flash space going to waste than about some hypothetical convenience. -- Måns Rullgård mans@...sr.com -- 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