This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Mach-O: Remove ambiguity of mach-o-le and mach-o-x86-64

From: Tristan Gingold <gingold at adacore dot com>
To: Iain Sandoe <developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk>
Cc: shinichiro hamaji <shinichiro dot hamaji at gmail dot com>, binutils Development <binutils at sourceware dot org>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:28:59 +0100
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Mach-O: Remove ambiguity of mach-o-le and mach-o-x86-64
References: <CALOyH=++wnGQePk8YVFHsoE5pfF7H7==yjw75Xk8yAHp2TjW-A@mail.gmail.com> <6CC887BD-A591-4B25-9CCD-F8DC5A64F1FE@sandoe-acoustics.co.uk>

On Dec 15, 2011, at 7:36 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:

> Hi...
> 
> On 15 Dec 2011, at 18:26, shinichiro hamaji wrote:
> 
>> When we use objdump for x86-64 mach-o files without explicit -b flag,
>> it says "File format is ambiguous" because there are two matching
>> formats (mach-o-le and mach-o-x86-64).
> 
> I was wondering recently whether there is any value to retaining this generic mach-o-le when we have specific vecs for the actual targets?

I think so.  The idea is to accept any mach-o file.

Tristan.

References:
- [PATCH] Mach-O: Remove ambiguity of mach-o-le and mach-o-x86-64
  - From: shinichiro hamaji
- Re: [PATCH] Mach-O: Remove ambiguity of mach-o-le and mach-o-x86-64
  - From: Iain Sandoe

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]