Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 12:52:43 +0200 From: Laszlo Molnar To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: UPX'ed image and debugger note [was Re: gcc-3.01 ...] Message-ID: <20010921125243.K4845@libra.eth.ericsson.se> References: <10109202219 DOT AA14923 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <7263-Fri21Sep2001102144+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <1001068276 DOT 15801 DOT 15 DOT camel AT bender DOT falconsoft DOT be> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <1001068276.15801.15.camel@bender.falconsoft.be>; from tim.van.holder@pandora.be on Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:31:15PM +0200 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 On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:31:15PM +0200, Tim Van Holder wrote: > > 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. No, UPX does use the original djgpp stub. Just like newer versions of DJP. The memory layout should not be a problem, page zero gets protected after the uncompression is finished. I'll look at the problem, if the problem is really caused by UPX. Can anybody confirm this? Laszlo