This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Question about clisp version naming
- From: Yaakov Selkowitz <yselkowitz at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 17:21:53 -0500
- Subject: Re: Question about clisp version naming
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5500B536 dot 4050108 at cornell dot edu> <87bnju6wox dot fsf at Rainer dot invalid> <5505C36F dot 5030802 at cornell dot edu> <1426443595 dot 8104 dot 9 dot camel at cygwin dot com> <5505D57C dot 3040005 at cornell dot edu> <87twxm5azp dot fsf at Rainer dot invalid> <55060BF6 dot 80801 at cornell dot edu> <87k2ygbw7v dot fsf at Rainer dot invalid> <87fv94bveq dot fsf at Rainer dot invalid> <87bnjsbuhm dot fsf at Rainer dot invalid> <1426535835 dot 8104 dot 62 dot camel at cygwin dot com> <877fugbta4 dot fsf at Rainer dot invalid> <55073E11 dot 2030701 at cornell dot edu> <87sid4a8q2 dot fsf at Rainer dot invalid>
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 23:16 +0100, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Ken Brown writes:
> > The clisp executables are not stripped because apparently there's a
> > disassemble command within clisp that doesn't work if the executables
> > are stripped. I don't actually know anything about this, but there
> > was a comment about that in the .cygport file that I inherited from
> > Reini. This may or may not explain why maxima.exe didn't like being
> > stripped.
>
> Looking at the executable it seems that it is a very small (~66 kiB)
> stub that then proceeds to load the rest of the file after having
> started the runtime. The memory image seems simply bolted on (as an
> overlay?), and gets removed when the executable is stripped.
That sounds very similar to OCaml; if so, I would expect there to be
some sort of magic number in the binary that can be used to identify
this type of executable (just because file(1) doesn't know about it
doesn't mean it doesn't exist). If we can pinpoint that, cygport can be
patched to not strip them.
--
Yaakov