Subject: Re: Latest kernel in development?

From: Alan Cox <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 15:25:51 +0100 (BST)

> ARM have an officially allocated ELF number.
> They have defined the E(xecutable) stuff, but not the L(inkable) stuff.
> They do intend to do so at some undefined stage in the future.
> They would be 'unhappy' if there were a competing standard.  Even if it
>   uses a different magic number.
> In particular, they wouldn't be happy for it to be released.

Tough shit. Sun aren't terribly happy about Sparc Linux either.

> We could use the ARM number and come up with our own definitions for the
> Linking standard and hope that ours becomes accepted by everyone.  This
> would upset ARM a lot and probably cause problems if we ever changed over
> to an ARM-sanctioned one that was different to our proposed one.

Better to use the ARM number and spec for executables and a random number
for linking. gnu ld supports multiple link formats at once so it can then
link old and new format.

> Or we could wait for ARM to get their act together.

Every minute you wait another vendor doesnt bother using Linux and/or ARM.
We've made a decision not to use ARM almost solely on the lack of ELF tools.
Im sure NatSemi and Intel are happy with ARM right now.

Alan

---

From: Philip Blundell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 19:53:05 -0000

>ARM have an officially allocated ELF number.

That's true.

>In particular, they wouldn't be happy for it to be released.

That's not what I understood from speaking to them.  Admittedly it does seem 
to be Russell's understanding, but...

p.