Jonathan Stone wrote:
> >Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> >> For temporary workaround, how about to prepare
> >> cpu_exec_ecoff_probe() for mips which just returns ENOEXEC?
> >
> >Yes, this is probably right. Would you do it ?
> 
> I'm confused.  Your'e saying its "right" to return ENOEXEC for
> ECOFF binaries on mips, even if COMPAT_ULTRIX is configured?
> Or is this only when COMPAT_ULTRIX is not configured, on a mips(el)?

The way it works, if a probe function (cpu_exec_ecoff_probe()) or
makecmds() function return ENOEXEC (i.e. "I do not know format of this
binary"), next execsw entry is tried. If COMPAT_ULTRIX is defined, next
entry would be that of Ultrix ecoff.

So yes, this should be a ~right solution.

Jaromir
-- 
Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org>      http://www.ics.muni.cz/~dolecek/
@@@@  Wanna a real operating system ? Go and get NetBSD, damn!  @@@@