From:	"Tim Van Holder" <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
To:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc:	<djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	RE: stubify and Windows ME
Date:	Tue, 13 Mar 2001 19:37:13 +0100
Message-ID:	<CAEGKOHJKAAFPKOCLHDIAEIKCBAA.tim.van.holder@pandora.be>
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-reply-to:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1010313120147.10085E@is>
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Importance:	Normal
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> If these are your private sections, why should stock djgpp.djl know
> about them?  What if some other user defines some private feature
> which conflicts with yours?
> 
> Can't you simply hack your private linker script in the same way you
> hacked GCC?
I suppose you're right.  The section name I used is standard though,
and in this case it produces a non-obvious crash because the DJGPP
build forces the use of its own djgpp.djl. I normally rely on the
linker script to DTRT (I made sure the linker scripts wasn't hardcoded
into ld, so I can adjust the linker script without having to recompile
ld). Maybe future versions of djgpp could even drop djgpp.djl entirely,
instead using $DJDIR/lib/ldscripts/i386go32.*; this seems cleaner.

- Raw text -