From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16158 invoked by alias); 5 May 2004 02:08:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16146 invoked from network); 5 May 2004 02:08:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO yosemite.airs.com) (209.128.65.135) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 May 2004 02:08:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 11185 invoked by uid 10); 5 May 2004 02:08:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 17576 invoked by uid 500); 5 May 2004 02:08:42 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: binutils@sources.redhat.com, cagney@gnu.org From: Ian Lance Taylor To: Andrew Cagney Cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: New bfd file format bfd_image .... References: <4096C87A.1080504@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 02:08:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4096C87A.1080504@gnu.org> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-05/txt/msg00082.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney writes: > - there's a problem tunneling the address of the in-memory elf header I don't really understand what this is used for, so please pardon the obvious questions. The ELF header in an ELF file is always at offset zero. Why can't you use that? Why do you need to specify the address somehow? Assuming some obvious answer to that, could you pass the information to the iovec somehow? > Another thought was to use a filed like: > abfd->origin > comments? I suppose that I do think it would be reasonable to consistently use abfd->origin as a file offset. The current code only uses it when abfd->my_archive is not NULL, but I don't see why we need to keep that requirement. We just set abfd->origin to 0 in the normal case. Ian