edward@engr.uky.edu (Edward C. Bennett) (05/23/88)
Last night I was fiddling with the fixRTC program. I compiled it
with the provided makefile and did a file(1). I got:
fixRTC: mc68k executable (shared demand paged with shared library) -F (0413 demand paged)
Then I compiled it with Emmet Gray's ccc script. file(1) gave:
a.out: mc68k executable (shared demand paged with shared library)
What's the -F stuff in the first example? The files are the same size both
unstripped and stripped.
--
Edward C. Bennett DOMAIN: edward@engr.uky.edu
(606) 257-4938 UUCP: {cbosgd|uunet}!ukma!ukecc!edward
"Goodnight M.A." BITNET: edward%ukecc.uucp@ukma
"He's become a growling, snarling mass of white-hot canine terror"jcs@tarkus.UUCP (John C. Sucilla) (05/25/88)
In article <2347@ukecc.engr.uky.edu> edward@engr.uky.edu (Edward C. Bennett) writes: >fixRTC: mc68k executable (shared demand paged with shared library) -F (0413 demand paged) > >Then I compiled it with Emmet Gray's ccc script. file(1) gave: > >a.out: mc68k executable (shared demand paged with shared library) > >What's the -F stuff in the first example? The files are the same size both >unstripped and stripped. It means the first example had the -F switch turned on during the ld phase. Whats makes this better than the -z option (besides alleged faster paging) I don't understand. Check out LD(1) in your users manual volume II. It says -F is the default but I don't believe it, I've never seen anything I compiled display that when file'd. Apparently, it works for you though, hmmmm... Could somebody explain why using .text and .data offsets the same as in the file .vs. using segment boundries is faster? -- John "C". Sucilla {ihnp4,chinet,ddsw1}!tarkus!jcs You have a better idea? Now's the time..