Re: Preview: portable dumper

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> "EZ" == Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

EZ> Thanks for your efforts, but I think this is a wrong direction, that will
EZ> eventually get us into the same problem we have with unexec: the need to
EZ> know and depend on intimate details of relocations, memory allocation,
EZ> etc. On top of that, adding Lisp objects will now require writing its
EZ> dumper back-end, so this will be a constant maintenance burden of the kind
EZ> that only a few of us can bear.

Is there a way to get away from such a requirement, Eli? If unexec becomes
untenable in the future, is there an alternative that doesn't place the burden
upon us to encode the right amount of information in the dumped file?

If I understand Daniel's contribution, he's proposing the equivalent of a
program loader for Emacs Lisp byte-code, stored within what amounts to a
custom object file format.

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2