Re: IA64 ELF relocation identifiers

[Jan Beulich]

Hmm, interesting opinion. Why should the ABI care about a single,
specific implementation? And the naming is inconsistent in Linux:
EM_IA_64, EF_IA_64_*, P[TF]_IA_64_*, SH[TF]_IA_64_*, and DT_IA_64_* all
use the ABI mandated naming. It is just the relocations which don't
match...

>>> Alan Modra <address@hidden> 11.12.03 00:19:35 >>>
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 11:28:16AM -0800, Jim Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 08:37, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > Is it intentional that both binutils and glibc do not use the IA64
> > processor specific ABI names (R_IA_64_*), but instead use
R_IA64_*?
> 
> This is unintentional.  I suspect it was a mistake in the original
port
> that David Mosberger made.  Or maybe the ABI documentation changed
after
> David Mosberger started his work and we failed to notice the
problem.

Perhaps you should change the ABI to match binutils, glibc, linux,
freebsd, prelink, elfutils, ...

-- 
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre