Hi,
With the dwelf_elf_begin fix now committed I intend to commit the
elfclassify tool as attached. It now treats a NULL return from
[dwelf_]elf_begin always as error. It has the new --library
classification and various fixes that were pointed out during the
review.
Cheers,
Mark>From 3f489b5c7c7
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 04:38:17PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:16:31AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > So the test should be:
> >
> > diff --git a/src/elfclassify.c b/src/elfclassify.c
> > index ebd42c1d5..b17d14d45 100644
> > --- a/src/elfclassify.c
> > +++ b/src/e
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:14:20AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Mark Wielaard:
>
> > What do you think about this change to dwelf_elf_begin?
> > The change would make it possible to detect real errors in the
> > elfclassify code, whether elf_begin or dwelf_elf_begin was used. So we
> > would n
* Mark Wielaard:
> What do you think about this change to dwelf_elf_begin?
> The change would make it possible to detect real errors in the
> elfclassify code, whether elf_begin or dwelf_elf_begin was used. So we
> would not misclassify files (but return an error status of 2).
I'm not really fami
On Mon, 2019-07-29 at 16:24 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:43:56AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > * Mark Wielaard:
> >
> > > + if (elf == NULL)
> > > +{
> > > + /* This likely means it just isn't an ELF file, probably not a
> > > + real issue, but warn if ver
* Mark Wielaard:
>> Regarding the test case, I think if the build target is ELF, it makes
>> sense to check that the elfutils binaries themselves are classified as
>> expected, with the current build flags. This will detect changes
>> required due to the evolution of the toolchain.
>
> That is wh
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:22:13AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Mark Wielaard:
>
> > Signed-off-by: Mark Wielaard
>
> Does elfutils use DCO? Then yoy have my signoff as well:
>
> Signed-off-by: Florian Weimer
Thanks. Yes, elfutils uses a Developer Certificate of Origin based on
the linux
* Mark Wielaard:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:16:31AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Mark Wielaard:
>>
>> > +/* Called to process standard input if flag_stdin is not no_stdin. */
>> > +static void
>> > +process_stdin (int *status)
>> > +{
>> > + char delim;
>> > + if (flag_stdin == do_stdin
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:16:31AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Mark Wielaard:
>
> > +/* Called to process standard input if flag_stdin is not no_stdin. */
> > +static void
> > +process_stdin (int *status)
> > +{
> > + char delim;
> > + if (flag_stdin == do_stdin0)
> > +delim = '\0';
>
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:43:56AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Mark Wielaard:
>
> > + if (elf == NULL)
> > +{
> > + /* This likely means it just isn't an ELF file, probably not a
> > +real issue, but warn if verbose reporting. */
> > + if (verbose > 0)
> > + fprintf (std
* Mark Wielaard:
> Signed-off-by: Mark Wielaard
Does elfutils use DCO? Then yoy have my signoff as well:
Signed-off-by: Florian Weimer
You should you list yourself as an author somewhere in the commit
message. This is so much more than what I wrote.
Regarding the test case, I think if the
* Mark Wielaard:
> +/* Called to process standard input if flag_stdin is not no_stdin. */
> +static void
> +process_stdin (int *status)
> +{
> + char delim;
> + if (flag_stdin == do_stdin0)
> +delim = '\0';
> + else
> +delim = '\n';
> +
> + char *buffer = NULL;
> + size_t buffer_size
* Mark Wielaard:
> + if (elf == NULL)
> +{
> + /* This likely means it just isn't an ELF file, probably not a
> + real issue, but warn if verbose reporting. */
> + if (verbose > 0)
> + fprintf (stderr, "warning: %s: %s\n", current_path, elf_errmsg (-1));
> + return fa
On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 02:04:48AM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 11:51:16PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 01:57:27AM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> [...]
> > > btw, I think it would be appropriate to move the has_dynamic check before
> > > the fi
On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 11:51:16PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 01:57:27AM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
[...]
> > btw, I think it would be appropriate to move the has_dynamic check before
> > the first check in is_shared that returns true.
>
> Yes, that is probably fine,
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 05:54:57PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> I went through these patches, albeit in a somewhat cursory fashion, and
> they look okay to me.
>
> Do you think this is enough to port over RPM's find-debuginfo.sh?
Yes, I think this would make it possible to drop reliance on
* Mark Wielaard:
> On Thu, 2019-04-18 at 13:17 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Florian Weimer:
>>
>> > > BTW. Florian, the extra options are certainly not required for you to
>> > > implement to get eu-elfclassify accepted. They are just suggestions,
>> > > which we might decide not to do/add.
On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 01:57:27AM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 11:36:53PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > If the ELF type is ET_DYN and the object is not marked as DF_1_PIE,
> > > could we come up with a more reliable heuristics than DT_SONAME and
> > > PT_INTERP?
> >
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 02:47:09PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> The individual commits can be found here:
> https://code.wildebeest.org/git/user/mjw/elfutils/log/?h=elfclassify
>
> Please let me know if any of this looks bad or unusual.
>
> I'll write some testcases.
And as always when writing
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 11:36:53PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 12:23:08AM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 11:00:49PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > * Dmitry V. Levin:
> > >
> > > >> So, I don't think the code is wrong. We might want to tweak
On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 12:23:08AM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 11:00:49PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > * Dmitry V. Levin:
> >
> > >> So, I don't think the code is wrong. We might want to tweak the comment
> > >> a bit though, to make it less definitive?
> > >
> > >
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 11:00:49PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Dmitry V. Levin:
>
> >> So, I don't think the code is wrong. We might want to tweak the comment
> >> a bit though, to make it less definitive?
> >
> > What I'm saying is that has_soname is just a hint which is probably even
> > le
* Dmitry V. Levin:
>> So, I don't think the code is wrong. We might want to tweak the comment
>> a bit though, to make it less definitive?
>
> What I'm saying is that has_soname is just a hint which is probably even
> less reliable than has_program_interpreter.
If I recall correctly, I added the
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:21:53PM +0200, Mark wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-07-19 at 16:43 +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 02:47:09PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > [...]
> > > +static bool
> > > +is_shared (void)
> > > +{
> > > + if (!is_loadable ())
> > > +return false;
>
On Fri, 2019-07-19 at 16:43 +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 02:47:09PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> [...]
> > +static bool
> > +is_shared (void)
> > +{
> > + if (!is_loadable ())
> > +return false;
> > +
> > + /* The ELF type is very clear: this is an executable. */
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 02:47:09PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
[...]
> +static bool
> +is_shared (void)
> +{
> + if (!is_loadable ())
> +return false;
> +
> + /* The ELF type is very clear: this is an executable. */
> + if (elf_type == ET_EXEC)
> +return false;
> +
> + /* If the object
Hi,
Some answers to this older discussion to explain some of my recent
commits suggested for elfclassify.
On Tue, 2019-04-16 at 13:38 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Mark Wielaard:
> > --elf PATH return 0 whenever the file can be opened and a minimal ELF
> > header can be read (it might not be a
Hi,
Sorry, this took way too long. But I really like this code.
On Thu, 2019-04-18 at 13:17 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Florian Weimer:
>
> > > BTW. Florian, the extra options are certainly not required for you to
> > > implement to get eu-elfclassify accepted. They are just suggestions,
>
* Florian Weimer:
>> BTW. Florian, the extra options are certainly not required for you to
>> implement to get eu-elfclassify accepted. They are just suggestions,
>> which we might decide not to do/add. Or they can be added by others if
>> they think they are useful.
>
> Understood. I would rathe
* Mark Wielaard:
>> I still need to implement an --unstripped option and fix the
>> iteration over the dynamic section.
>
> We did already discuss some of this off-list.
Thanks for summarizing the previous discussion.
> --elf PATH return 0 whenever the file can be opened and a minimal ELF
> head
Hi,
On Fri, 2019-04-12 at 17:38 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> This patch adds an elfclassify tool, mainly for the benefit of RPM's
> find-debuginfo.sh.
I have CCed Panu to see if he has any input.
> I still need to implement an --unstripped option and fix the
> iteration over the dynamic sectio
31 matches
Mail list logo
