On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 16:47 +0100, Nick Clifton wrote:
> > I've tried to tackle the conditional compilation part, and would like
> > your renewed input on it, I may have missed some points. Naming for
> > instance.
>
>
> Naming was mostly OK. There were two problems.
> pe_print_compressed_pdata() should really be called
> pe_print_ce_compressed_pdata() since it assumes
> _IMAGE_CE_RUNTIME_FUNCTION_ENTRY formatted data right ? One day someone
> might want to write a MIPS version of this function, so we will need a
Looks like you got interrupted while writing this sentence. Not sure
what you mean.
> Secondly you did not provide a default definition of bfd_pe_print_pdata,
> so the PE ports which do not use this new feature will not build. Try
> configuring a binutils build with "--enable-targets=all" to see this
> happening.
Didn't know about that. I've used it, and added one or more lines to 30
other .c files. In most cases this is just
#define bfd_pe_print_pdata NULL
That addresses the build problems with "--enable-targets=all". This is
what you wanted me to do, right ?
> Here are two other things however which I think you should also fix:
I'll address the other points in your message too.
One more question though. I moved my pe_print_ce_compressed_pdata
function into pe-arm-wince.c , it was in peXXigen.c in my initial patch.
The peXXigen.c doesn't seem right for this because this function is not
to be treated with the XX replacement stuff. However, pe-arm-wince.c
doesn't seem right either because the pe_print_ce_compressed_pdata
function is to be used both for ARM and for SH.
So where should I put it (and its helper functions) ?
Thanks for your help !
Danny
--
Danny Backx ; danny.backx - at - scarlet.be ; http://danny.backx.info
_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
