>I hope I haven't confused too many people of my (ab)use of the term
>"exec package".  When UTSLing, I found out that what I call exec
>package and what it in reality is doesn't quite agree.  So I have to
>invent another term for my use.  Basically it's rather an extension to
>the execsw (for now I've only needed a name field).  Anyway my
>intention is to be able to tell exec to use the ELF loading code and
>the SVR4 emulation, or ELF & Linux, or even ELF & NetBSD...  So it's
>perhaps better to call it "load package" or something similar.  What
>do you think?  Is there perhaps a good term already in use?
>
>PS For you who wonder what an "exec package" really is, it's a per
>   process structure containing info on the specific executable being
>   executed.  It is a transient thing dropped as soon as we're up and
>   running the new binary.

What else is in there other than the executable format (e.g. ELF)?  I
would think that you could get that directly from the binary.
-- 
Mike Long <mike.long@analog.com>           http://www.shore.net/~mikel
VLSI Design Engineer         finger mikel@shore.net for PGP public key
Analog Devices, CPD Division          CCBF225E7D3F7ECB2C8F7ABB15D9BE7B
Norwood, MA 02062 USA                assert(*this!=opinionof(Analog));