Subject: Re: Debugging info for commercial linkers?
From: [email-masked] (Tim Iverson)

8 Aug 1997 17:31:31 -0700
Approved: [email-masked]
Distribution: cygnus
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Original-To: [email-masked]
Original-Cc: [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]> from "Jason Zions" at Aug 8, 97 03:31:04 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Original-Sender: [email-masked]

Thanks!  This is incredibly helpful.  While it may not be the best news for
my application, it probably means that it would be quicker and surer for me
to just add OMF support (which is very well-documented) to BFD.

Is there some compelling reason folks are even trying to support pe-i386
given that MS seems uninterested in documenting it?  I guess if MSC outputs
it, that might be a tiny reason.  ;-)

- Tim


+----------------
| Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 15:31:04 -0600
| From: Jason Zions <[email-masked]>
| To: Tim Iverson <[email-masked]>
| CC: [email-masked]
| Subject: Re: Debugging info for commercial linkers?
| References: <[email-masked]>
| 
| Variables are completely hosed. Line numbers for functions are partly
....
| There isn't a *really* good reference for the NT PE format. Chunks of it
| are discussed in various MSDN articles; some of it can be derived from
| various public headers in the SDK. Some of it, though, requires heavy
| duty bit-grovelling detective work.
| 
| Jason
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".