From: Martin Str|mberg Message-Id: <200101281342.OAA16994@father.ludd.luth.se> Subject: Re: djasm patch #3 In-Reply-To: from Eli Zaretskii at "Jan 28, 2001 09:40:12 am" To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 14:42:34 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 Precedence: bulk According to Eli Zaretskii: > > On Sat, 27 Jan 2001, JT Williams wrote: > > > Do these changes deserve explicit entries in wc20x.txi? > > IMHO, yes. I'd like some feedback on this as my English seems to be somewhat slow today: RCS file: /cvs/djgpp/djgpp/src/docs/kb/wc204.txi,v retrieving revision 1.42 diff -p -u -r1.42 wc204.txi --- wc204.txi 2001/01/28 13:34:16 1.42 +++ wc204.txi 2001/01/28 13:40:24 @@ -233,3 +233,10 @@ that OS. The function @code{lfilelength} added with return type @code{long long} to support file sizes of up to @math{2^64-2}. +@pindex djasm AT r{, ISO dates} +The dates inserted into the object file by @code{djasm} now follows ISO +format. + +@pindex djasm AT r{, new executable header offset} +@code{djasm} now sets the offset of new executable field in the header +of executables to zero (meaning not used). Right, MartinS