Linux readelf 与 objdump：为什么两者都需要
声明：本页面是StackOverFlow热门问题的中英对照翻译，遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议，如果您需要使用它，必须同样遵循CC BY-SA许可，注明原文地址和作者信息，同时你必须将它归于原作者（不是我）：StackOverFlow
原文地址: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8979664/
Warning: these are provided under cc-by-sa 4.0 license. You are free to use/share it, But you must attribute it to the original authors (not me):
StackOverFlow
readelf vs. objdump: why are both needed
提问by zr.
I need to learn about the ELF file layout for a project I am working on and I noticed the existence of these tools. Why do all Linux distributions include both readelf and objdump? Do these tools complement one another? When would i prefer to use one over another?
我需要了解我正在处理的项目的 ELF 文件布局，并且我注意到这些工具的存在。为什么所有 Linux 发行版都包含 readelf 和 objdump？这些工具是否相互补充？我什么时候更喜欢使用一个？
采纳答案by synthesizerpatel
from binutils/readelf.c:
来自 binutils/readelf.c：
/* The difference between readelf and objdump:
Both programs are capabale of displaying the contents of ELF format files,
so why does the binutils project have two file dumpers ?
The reason is that objdump sees an ELF file through a BFD filter of the
world; if BFD has a bug where, say, it disagrees about a machine constant
in e_flags, then the odds are good that it will remain internally
consistent. The linker sees it the BFD way, objdump sees it the BFD way,
GAS sees it the BFD way. There was need for a tool to go find out what
the file actually says.
This is why the readelf program does not link against the BFD library - it
exists as an independent program to help verify the correct working of BFD.
There is also the case that readelf can provide more information about an
ELF file than is provided by objdump. In particular it can display DWARF
debugging information which (at the moment) objdump cannot. */
