On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 08:46:11AM -0600, David Smith wrote: > > + The ABI of the backend modules is not guaranteed. Really, not guarantee > > + whatsoever. We are enforcing this in the code. The modules and their > > + users must match. No third-party EBL module are supported or allowed. > > + The only reason there are separate modules is to not have the code for > > + all architectures in all the binaries. */ > > The comment is fine (although I think you meant "Really, no guarantee" > instead of "Really, not guarantee").
Thanks. I silently fixed this in both the header and the README, commit c80673. > However, what about making this > internal header more internal? Does code using elfutils need anything > out of this file? If not, why does it end up in /usr/include/elfutils? Some distributions (e.g. Fedora) package elfutils libasm. Unfortunately libasm isn't really ready to be declared stable. In particular asm_begin () takes an Ebl *handle to initialize the AsmCtx_t *handle with. There is no way to get an Ebl *handle except by using the libebl.h header. As was recently discussed we might just have to break this and update the .so version to show we made a mistake. https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/elfutils-devel/2014-December/004471.html Ulrich, do you have any more comments on that discussion? Are there any other changes desired if we are going to break ABI anyway? Cheers, Mark
