I recall a PR that jonathan kept bugging me about... Can someone
please tell me what the right thing to do is?

christos

In article <20011120150444.S7885@goldberry.poofy.goof.com>,
Aaron J. Grier <agrier@poofygoof.com> wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 06:24:01PM -0700, Michael L. Hitch wrote:
>
>>   Here's the actual output from file for both netbsd.ecoff and sash.  I'm
>> somewhat confused as to what MIPSEL-BE really means.
>> 
>> netbsd.ecoff: MIPSEL-BE ECOFF executable (impure) not stripped - version 10.2
>> 
>> sash: MIPSEB MIPS-II ECOFF executable (impure) not stripped - version 6.21
>> 
>>   And here's another interesting thing - using elf2ecoff gives me:
>> netbsd.xxx: MIPSEL-BE ECOFF executable (impure) not stripped - version 10.2
>> 
>>   While objcopy --target=ecoff-bigmips givse me:
>> netbsd.xxx: MIPSEB ECOFF executable (paged) not stripped - version 0.0
>
>I could've sworn I filed a PR about this a few years ago, but I can't
>seem to find it...  the magic(5) database used by file(1) and actual
>files built by gnu toolchain don't agree with each other.  I'm not sure
>which to blame.
>
>heck, I get the following on my little-endian DECStation 5000/240.
>goldberry$ file /netbsd
>/netbsd: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, MIPS R3000_BE - invalid byte order,
>version 1 MathCoPro/FPU/MAU Required, statically linked, not stripped
>
>notice the "R3000_BE - invalid byte order" bit.  entertaining.  :)
>
>-- 
>  Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | agrier@poofygoof.com
>     "No single layer of abstraction can save the world or even make
>      good coffee."  --  Kevin P. Neal