Re: kerneld & binfmt_aout

Richard Henderson (
Sun, 14 Dec 1997 19:08:16 -0800

> IMHO, this shows that binfmt autoloading is not meant to work.

I'm of mostly the same opinion.

> There are three options:
> a) deprecate the feature, leave the code as-is, document the limitations.
> b) try to make some new clever approach. For example, passing the
> file name of the executable seems to be a much more reliable approach
> than passing the first n bytes. kerneld could then do what file(1) does,
> perhaps passing a different magic file that spits out the name of
> the module.
> c) continue the current road: change the aliasing every m kernel versions,
> so ongoing confusion is guaranteed :-(
> Since we have binfmt_misc now, option a) seems to work best. There are
> only so many 'true' binary formats per architecture, everything else
> falls in the interpreter category and is thus handled by binfmt_misc.

Unless someone screams and is willing to do the work, I'll do `a'.
Otherwise, we'll come up with something for `b'.