Message-Id:	<199908251651.SAA03972@robby.dittmannsdorf.de>
From:	Robert Hoehne <robert DOT hoehne AT gmx DOT net>
Organization:	none provided
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Wed, 25 Aug 1999 18:54:20 +0200
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: gcc-2.95.1
References:	<B0000098829 AT stargate DOT astr DOT lu DOT lv>
In-reply-to:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.990822112103.6405N-100000@is>
X-mailer:	Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11)
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

> On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote:
> 
> > Of course. Patch for long section names in djgpp.djl is needed here. 
> 
> Is the version that is currently in the DJGPP CVS tree (reproduced below) 
> okay?  Robert, could you please verify that it solves the problem for 
> you?

It does not solve the problem for me but this has nothing to
say, since my problems seems to be realted to something
else. Here is not the situation: I tried my test program also
on work (it's NT but I think, this is not relevant) and there the
compiled object file has a size of the .eh_fram section of
0x1a0 and compiled on my home-system it has a size of
0x168. I used on both systems the exactly same gcc binaries
and binutils binaries so I have currently absolutely no clue,
why the sizes are different but I will try to find out the reason.

Robert

******************************************************
* email:   Robert Hoehne <robert DOT hoehne AT gmx DOT net>     *
* Post:    Am Berg 3, D-09573 Dittmannsdorf, Germany *
* WWW:     http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/~sho/rho        *
******************************************************

- Raw text -