* Re: fat binaries ?
1996-05-28 7:47 ` fat binaries ? H.J. Lu
@ 1996-05-28 9:25 ` Mat Hostetter
1996-05-29 0:04 ` Samuel Figueroa
1996-05-30 0:21 ` Richard Stallman
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Mat Hostetter @ 1996-05-28 9:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: Andre Schroeter, gcc2, Ian Lance Taylor, Ken Raeburn, gas2
>>>>> "H" == H J Lu <hjl@innovix.com> writes:
>> hallo, just a silly question out of curiosity:
>>
>> are there plans to include the functionality to produce 'fat
>> binaries' into the linux c compilers ? i mean the ability to
>> automaticaly crosscompile for different linux platforms and
>> bind everything into one binary? i think this would be very
>> nice for commercial companies that will only provide binaries.
>>
H> I doubt if it will ever be supported directly. Maybe a front
H> end?
FWIW, I seem to remember one of NeXT's engineers saying at a NeXTWORLD
conference that NeXT had patented fat binaries "for defensive
reasons". I haven't seen the patent, and my memory of that conference
is a bit fuzzy, so don't take my word for it.
-Mat
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: fat binaries ?
1996-05-28 7:47 ` fat binaries ? H.J. Lu
1996-05-28 9:25 ` Mat Hostetter
@ 1996-05-29 0:04 ` Samuel Figueroa
1996-05-30 0:21 ` Richard Stallman
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Samuel Figueroa @ 1996-05-29 0:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: Andre Schroeter, gcc2, Ian Lance Taylor, Ken Raeburn, gas2
If anyone is interested, you may want to look at what we did for our
compilers for NEXTSTEP, which support the creation of 4-way fat binaries. I
doubt we'll have any time to send patches to FSF in a reasonable time frame,
but we do make all our source code freely available, at least to our
customers.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: fat binaries ?
1996-05-28 7:47 ` fat binaries ? H.J. Lu
1996-05-28 9:25 ` Mat Hostetter
1996-05-29 0:04 ` Samuel Figueroa
@ 1996-05-30 0:21 ` Richard Stallman
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Richard Stallman @ 1996-05-30 0:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: hjl; +Cc: A.Schroeter, gcc2, ian, raeburn, gas2
I don't think it is essential to have fat binaries.
In fact I think it is more convenient to use other techniques
such as architecture-dependent symlinks together with separate
directories for the various architectures.
But if a convention is established for multi-architecture binaries, we
might as well support it. All that would be needed would be a simple
program to extract and install subfiles in an archive of that kind.
This is a modular design which would not involve any changes in the C
compiler or GAS, and perhaps not even in the binutils.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread