In article <BDAD9E15.333BC%sk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Stephen Kay <sk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>in article mwron-7C9B48.19120301112004@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MW Ron at
>mwron@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote on 11/1/04 7:12 PM:
>
>>> In response to a tech support issue from another company, I've been
told to
>>> "try compiling your executable without using relocs" - something I've
never
>>> heard of before. Sorry if it's probably a stupid question, but any
clues?
>>
>> I think they are talking about relocation tables known as Fixup tables.
>> .reloc sections of the code. You can select that and disassemble your
>> code to see what is .data or .text and .reloc sections among others.
>> I didn't see a way to block this with a pragma or anything so I'm not
>> sure how to do this. Maybe he means no preaddressing the DLL's that is
>> all I can think of.
>
>Thanks for the response, MWRon. I got a bit more info:
>
>> Engineering recommends compiling without the use of relocations.
>> Relocations are required for binaries which do not have a fixed load
>> base address such as DLLs. As for executables, the image base is
>> constant and therefore does not require relocations.
>>
>> In the VC6/7 linker, this feature is controlled by the option of
>> /FIXED:YES, to disable relocations. If you are using a non-VC linker,
>> you will need to determine what linker option is required to disable
the
>> feature.
>
>Do you have any idea how this translates to CW (I'm using CW7)? Would
that
>be in Linker> Decode Text Sections > Resolve Reolcations? Thanks.
Unfortunately, our linker doesn't have a way to do this. We always emit
relocations into executables.
Ron
--
Metrowerks Community Forum is a free online resource for developers
to discuss CodeWarrior topics with other users and Metrowerks' staff
-- http://www.metrowerks.com/community
--
Ron Liechty - MWRon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- http://www.metrowerks.com
|
