Revision as of 19:05, 26 April 2007 edit Unsound (talk \| contribs) 89 edits →Mac OS X using ELF? ← Previous edit		Revision as of 19:09, 26 April 2007 edit undo Unsound (talk \| contribs) 89 edits Strangely formulated sentence... Next edit →
Line 42: :See also [http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Porting/Conceptual/PortingUnix/compiling/chapter_4_section_7.html Porting UNIX/Linux applications to Mac OS X: Understanding Two-Level Namespaces] and [http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/DeveloperTools/TwoLevelNamespaces.html Mac OS X Developer Release Notes: Two-Level Namespace Executables], as perhaps what [http://plan99.net/autopackage/Linux_Problems#elf the ELF section of the "Linux Problems" page of the Autopackage Wiki] calls "hash" sometimes has ingredients that don't taste too bad, even if the hash as a whole isn't to your taste. [[User:Guy Harris\|Guy Harris]] 00:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC) == Strangely formulated sentence... == From the article: "Today the ELF format has replaced [snip] FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD operating systems (DragonFly BSD was forked from FreeBSD after the switch to ELF)" If DragonFly BSD was forked from FreeBSD _after_ the switch, then it should too use ELF? I think the it should say "before the switch"... but I'm tired and maybe my mind is playing tricks on me. --[[User:Unsound\|Unsound]] 19:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Executable and Linkable Format: Difference between revisions