In article <1193678283.2124.3.camel@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>,
Richard Earnshaw  <rearnsha@arm.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 12:25 -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>> On Oct 17, 2007, at 11:34 AM, Martin Fouts wrote:
>> 
>> >> We have 3rd party vendors that would prefer to deliver binaries and
>> > prefer to use ARM's compilers. We are finding that when RVCT generates
>> > EABI code it is not compatible with NetBSD. Structure alignment turns
>> > out to be a significant problem for us.
>> 
>> Correct.  NetBSD does not support the ARM EABI.  There are a variety  
>> of reasons for this, and back when I worked on the ARM GCC, I seem to  
>> recall that Richard Earnshaw even said that the EABI wasn't really  
>> appropriate for NetBSD.
>> 
>
>Nope, I do think I ever said that (the problem was that the EABI was
>still in development at the time we needed to freeze our ELF
>implementation).  In fact, I'd like to see NetBSD supporting the EABI
>now that it has stabilized.  We'll need to have some support in the
>kernel anyway in order to support more recent ARM/Linux binaries.

I am guessing that this is the reason I am getting SIGILL on linux
binaries, after the uname call.

christos