From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Mosberger Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 18:47:48 +0000 Subject: Re: libelf package Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org >>>>> On 22 Sep 2003 19:32:01 -0700, Jim Wilson said: Jim> On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 13:52, David Mosberger wrote: >> For what it's worth, Debian has a libelf package. Not that this helps >> with United Linux... Jim> I looked at the Debian package, it is the wrong one. The SuSE package Jim> is probably the same wrong one. For some definition of "wrong". ;-) Jim> There is a libelf project that Ulrich Drepper is working on, which he Jim> hopes will replace the bfd library in binutils some day. Quite a few Jim> people have heard of this by now. Yes, I've heard of it many times before, though not as "libelf". Jim> There is also a libelf project that was written by Michael Riepe, Uni Jim> Hannover. I'd never heard of this one before today, and I doubt many Jim> others have either. AFAIK, it's a fairly standard interface. I certainly have known about it for years and I suspect many others do, too. Jim> Ulrich's project is very much a Red Hat project. Yes. Jim> The only way to get it that I know of it to get an RPM from Red Jim> Hat. This will have to change if he wants to replace bfd, but Jim> that is the way it is for now. This is in the elfutils Jim> package, even though everyone calls it libelf, probably to try Jim> to avoid confusion with the other libelf project. I looked at the source code of elfutils and it seems to me that the libelf.h/libelf.so included there is API-compatible with the libelf by Michael Riepe (which is good, I suppose...). --david