Re: Question on BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT in GCC on NetBSD/m68k
Finn Thain <[email protected]> Wed, 18 Jun 2025 13:19:01 +1000 (AEST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.ports.m68k,gmane.linux.debian.ports.68k,gmane.linux.ports.m68k |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. ---14638117741461144186175021674129 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Mon, 16 Jun 2025, Jason Thorpe wrote: >=20 > > On Jun 16, 2025, at 2:10=E2=80=AFAM, Laurent Vivier <[email protected]>= wrote: > >=20 > > I think you need to change the ABI type in the ELF header:=20 > > https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executable_and_Linkable_Format >=20 > 4-byte alignment binaries should have ELFOSABI_SYSV (0) (since that ABI= =20 > spec is where the 4 byte alignment comes from). If Linux/m68k is=20 > already using that, then those binaries are broken by definition. >=20 > Let=E2=80=99s hope existing Linux/m68k binaries are using ELFOSABI_LINUX = /=20 > ELFOSABI_GNU (3) (sorry, I don=E2=80=99t have any handy to check). >=20 > If the existing binaries correctly label themselves has having the=20 > Linux-specific ABI, then this is trivial and there=E2=80=99s no reason to= use a=20 > note to differentiate them. >=20 Do you know of a good solution for this open bug? https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D30273 ---14638117741461144186175021674129--