Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2001/09/21/06:32:47
On Fri, 2001-09-21 at 09:21, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
> > Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 17:19:56 -0500 (CDT)
> >
> > The way UPX works is it is a small decompressor - less than 4Kb. It is
> > built to load itself in the 0-0x1000 address spaces, with the image data
> > stored after it. So, if you load a UPX image in the debugger, you
> > will see an EIP of less than 0x1000 (and typically a meaningless
> > instruction stream if you disassemble).
>
> Is UPX built with DJGPP? If not, what use is it to try to debug it
> with DJGPP debuggers?
It is built with DJGPP.
UPX-compressed executables are stripped and basically useless for
debugging anyway; if UPX-compressing a program introduces crashes, we're
probably better off submitting a bug report to Markus, rather than
fixing it on our own.
> If it is built with DJGPP, doesn't its memory layout violate some of
> the assumptions in dbgcom.c and v2load.c?
It uses a custom stub for its output files, so that is quite possible.
> > dbgcom (in the read_child routine) has some "extra" code to prevent
> > hitting the child's null page protection - it won't attempt to touch
> > addresses less than 4096 bytes.
>
> Right, and for a good reason. We could of course avoid doing that if
> UPX is involved, but we need a way to detect this situation. Can you
> suggest how to detect that?
There's a UPX copyright string embedded in the image of UPX-compressed
executables; if that's loaded into memory (and it seems to be), we can
detect UPX.
- Raw text -