From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932320AbcENRZG (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 May 2016 13:25:06 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:60676 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752730AbcENRZF (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 May 2016 13:25:05 -0400 Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 18:25:02 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Chad Brewbaker Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: dlopen() and ELF alternatives Message-ID: <20160514172502.GA14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 11:41:54AM -0500, Chad Brewbaker wrote: > In 2016 we are still relying on flat file databases to store binaries. This is not a discussion club; cut the rethorics if you want to be taken seriously. You sound as if the only problem you have is that format is insufficiently buzzword-compliant; if that's the case, nobody is going to give a damn, obviously. If you *do* have more specific problem, have a courtesy to describe it... > I am looking for prior attempts at alternative interfaces to dlopen(), and > alternative formats for object files. There had been a plenty of object file formats; take a look at libbfd for a sample of that panopticum.