Re: Clarifications about ELF(5)

2021-02-27 Thread George Brown
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 07:26:42PM +, George Brown wrote: > > > hi. diff committed, with one change: we did not add "must" (just removed > > > "usually"). > > > > > > jmc > > > > Thanks Jason. Though browsing cvsweb it seems the commit did include the > > "must" not sure if the decision

Re: Clarifications about ELF(5)

2021-02-27 Thread Jason McIntyre
On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 07:26:42PM +, George Brown wrote: > > hi. diff committed, with one change: we did not add "must" (just removed > > "usually"). > > > > jmc > > Thanks Jason. Though browsing cvsweb it seems the commit did include the > "must" not sure if the decision changed after

Clarifications about ELF(5)

2021-02-27 Thread George Brown
> hi. diff committed, with one change: we did not add "must" (just removed > "usually"). > > jmc Thanks Jason. Though browsing cvsweb it seems the commit did include the "must" not sure if the decision changed after sending your mail or the wrong diff got applied?

Re: Clarifications about ELF(5)

2021-02-27 Thread Jason McIntyre
On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 12:24:33PM +, George Brown wrote: > Binaries without a .note.openbsd.ident section fail to execute. This > note section is mentioned in the ELF man page as follows. > > > .note This section holds information in the note section format > >described

Clarifications about ELF(5)

2021-02-27 Thread George Brown
Binaries without a .note.openbsd.ident section fail to execute. This note section is mentioned in the ELF man page as follows. > .note This section holds information in the note section format >described below. This section is of type SHT_NOTE. No >attribute types