Hello, > On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 2:55 AM Tyler Retzlaff
[...] >> i'm jealous we don't have libabigail on windows, so helpful. Heh, thank you for the kind words. David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> writes: [...] > libabigail is written in C++ and relies on the elfutils and libxml2 > libraries. That is correct. Thank you for chiming in, David. > I am unclear about what binary format is used in Windows... so I am > not sure how much work would be required to have it on Windows. So for a little bit of context, libabigail constructs its own internal representation (IR) of the artifacts relevant to perform the analysis. The middle-end of the system then performs the needed analysis on that IR. The binary format itself it handled by a front-end. Today, we have front-ends that reads the ELF format and constructs the IR and hands it over to the middle end. One could very well imagine a new front-end that knows how to read the Portable Executable (PE) format that is used on Windows, along with its accompanying debug information. Luckily, I've written articles[1][2] that explains how libabigail recently switched to having a multi-front-end architecture that we have used to support alternative debug information formats like CTF[3] and BTF. In light of that, adding a new PE front-end would be "just work to do", I would think. And I would obviously not be opposed to helping such a project and merging the result in the end. As for any feature request, I would encourage potentially interested parties to file an "enhancement request" on the bug tracker of the project[4]. > That's more something to discuss with Dodji :-). Thanks for the plug ;-) I hope this helps. [1]: https://developers.redhat.com/articles/2023/01/05/libabigail-multiple-debugging-formats#the_resulting_multi_front_end_architecture [2]: https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/bpf-type-format-support-libabigail-23 [3]: https://lwn.net/Articles/795384/ [4]: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi?product=libabigail Cheers, -- Dodji
