On Mon, Jun 8, 2026, at 10:41 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote: >> On 8 Jun 2026, at 15:33, Iain Sandoe <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 8 Jun 2026, at 15:23, Pietro Monteiro <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2026, at 9:59 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote: >>>>> On 8 Jun 2026, at 14:53, Jose E. Marchesi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 8 Jun 2026, at 14:09, Pietro Monteiro <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mach-O objects prefix section names with double underscore instead of >>>>>>> period. Use correct exports section name on systems that use Mach-O. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> gcc/algol68/ChangeLog: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * a68.h (A68_EXPORT_SECTION_NAME): Prefix name with double >>>>>>> underscores for Mach-O objects. >>>>>> >>>>>> I am a bit puzzled by this - since I had memory that we (Jose and I) had >>>>>> already >>>>>> fixed things so that Darwin’s segment and section names were correct. >>>>>> (indeed, AFAIK a68 exports in object files and convenience libraries are >>>>>> already >>>>>> working)? >>>>> >>>>> I am also a bit confused. From our past testing, it looked like in >>>>> Darwin it was ok to create a section .a68_exports and then read it in, >>>>> conventions notwithstanding. >>>> >>>> That is my expectation - that, at the binary level, all that matters is >>>> that the >>>> segment and section names are <= 16 chars in length (there is no >>>> terminating >>>> nul in the file). >>> >>> Without the patch `otool` shows the libga68 .dylib having a __GNU_A68 >>> segment with a __a68_exports section in it. Maybe the system `as` >>> (clang) "fixes" the name ? >> >> I don’t think so. >> >> e.g. posix.s ==> posix.o >> >> .build_version macos, 15, 0 >> .section __GNU_A68,__a68_exports >> >> It looks like we are emitting this from the compiler already .. which kinda >> stacks >> up with my recollection that we’d already been down this road - I do >> apologise >> that my recollection is fuzzy .. > > config/darwin.h: > > /* Algol68 */ > #undef A68_EXPORT_SECTION_NAME > #define A68_EXPORT_SECTION_NAME "__a68_exports" > > Which, I believe already overides because of... > > #ifndef A68_EXPORT_SECTION_NAME > > so the proposed patch is not needed (already done). > > sorry for taking time to recall the details.
sorry I got mixed up. I guess I only grep'ed the algol68 dir. lesson learned :) pietro > Iain > > >> >> Iain
