Sender:	root AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID:	<37835FF7.2CAFA47B@inti.gov.ar>
Date:	Wed, 07 Jul 1999 11:11:03 -0300
From:	salvador <salvador AT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
Organization:	INTI
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.6 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.36 i686)
X-Accept-Language:	es-AR, en, es
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
CC:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: .align directives in libc.a
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 990707164920 DOT 2851n-100000 AT is>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, salvador wrote:
>
> > Yes, the problem is that:
> >
> > -------------- first file
> > functions here
> > last_address
> > -------------- next .o file linked by ld
> > last_address aligned to 8 bytes boundary
> > functions here
> > --------------
> >
> > So if you try to align to 16, 32, etc bytes boundaries you won't succeed. Also:
> > putting a .align directive at the end of first file doesn't work.
> > This value is hardcoded in binutils.
>
> So we need to change the value in Binutils, to get proper alignment.

Yes but then we will bloat libc. As I said before not even M$ is aligning the
run-time library in this way (16 bytes).

SET

--
Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET). (Electronics Engineer)
Visit my home page: http://welcome.to/SetSoft or
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/6552/
Alternative e-mail: set-soft AT usa DOT net set AT computer DOT org
                    set AT ieee DOT org set-soft AT bigfoot DOT com
Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero
Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA Phone: +(5411) 4759 0013

- Raw text -