On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 10:17 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > I guess I could just use binutils readelf then. Pity, since I like the > > eu-readelf output better to be honest. > > You can just write your tool using libelf and with the output format you > like. It's just not part of eu-readelf.
It don't think it is very convenient to have different tools for this. Why not make it part of eu-readelf, especially when binutils readelf also supports it. The easiest way to do your suggestion would actually be to just copy readelf.c, rename it digelf.c and add the parsing of sections not supported by plain eu-readelf. The reason it is nice to have parsing/printing of actually used elf sections as part of the same tool is that you can then reuse all the normal output conventions, like in this case the address ranges, with or without symbol resolution depending on -N, etc. Next on my list would be the sdt elf notes section, which also IMHO should just be part of the same tool with which you inspect elf files. Thanks, Mark _______________________________________________ elfutils-devel mailing list elfutils-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/elfutils-devel
