On Sat, 2012-05-26 at 17:21 -0600, Frank Cox wrote:
> Ok, then where does it come from, since it's not the current kernel version
> and
> it's not the elfutils version? gcc somehow finds that number and inserts it
> into the binary. Where did it find it and why is that number not the same as
>
On Sat, 26 May 2012 21:32:52 +0200
Reindl Harald wrote:
> from the binary, "file" does only print what a file contains
Ok, then where does it come from, since it's not the current kernel version and
it's not the elfutils version? gcc somehow finds that number and inserts it
into the binary. Whe
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 12:51 AM, Frank Cox wrote:
>> it DOES NOT, learn to read outputs - it speaks about the elfutils
>> why should their output reflect the current kernel point version
>> it is not their job because "uname" exists
A mail is missing i guess ?
>
> [frankcox@mutt ~]$ rpm -q
On Sat, 26 May 2012 10:25:54 +0200
Reindl Harald wrote:
> > Why does the output from file say "Linux 2.6.18" when the actual kernel in
> > use is 2.6.32?
>
> it DOES NOT, learn to read outputs - it speaks about the elfutils
> why should their output reflect the current kernel point version
> it i
I just noticed this, which doesn't actually seem to affect anything but does
create a mystery:
[frankcox@mutt temp]$ cat test.c
#include
int main(void)
{
printf("Hello world\n");
return 0;
}
[frankcox@mutt temp]$ gcc -o test test.c
[frankcox@mutt temp]$ file test
t
5 matches
Mail list logo
