[Bug ld/30144] LD --entry does not accept function name

2025-04-25 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30144 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug ld/30144] LD --entry does not accept function name

2025-04-25 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30144 --- Comment #9 from Sourceware Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Nick Clifton : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=a965df05e48d98298f73e49d28028b3a760eeeab commit a965df05e48d98298f73e49d28028b3a760eee

[Bug ld/30144] LD --entry does not accept function name

2025-04-23 Thread pali at kernel dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30144 Pali Rohár changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #16036|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug ld/30144] LD --entry does not accept function name

2025-04-23 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30144 --- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton --- Created attachment 16041 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16041&action=edit Proposed patch Hi Pali, The secret is to add a new emulation function. These functions are target spec

[Bug ld/30144] LD --entry does not accept function name

2025-04-22 Thread pali at kernel dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30144 --- Comment #6 from Pali Rohár --- Created attachment 16036 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16036&action=edit ld_pei386_entry_point.diff Nick, I have tried something, it is in the attachment. But it needs to be improve

[Bug ld/30144] LD --entry does not accept function name

2025-04-22 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30144 --- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton --- (In reply to Pali Rohár from comment #3) > > Looking into this, it is actually quite hard to predict the mangling of the > > entry symbol name. > > Nick, cannot be 32-bit x86 PE ld easily extended in this

[Bug ld/30144] LD --entry does not accept function name

2025-04-20 Thread pali at kernel dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30144 --- Comment #4 from Pali Rohár --- Nick, what about my idea from previous post? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug ld/30144] LD --entry does not accept function name

2024-03-12 Thread pali at kernel dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30144 --- Comment #3 from Pali Rohár --- > Looking into this, it is actually quite hard to predict the mangling of the > entry symbol name. Nick, cannot be 32-bit x86 PE ld easily extended in this way? When --entry=XYZ is specified at command line

[Bug ld/30144] LD --entry does not accept function name

2023-04-12 Thread pali at kernel dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30144 --- Comment #2 from Pali Rohár --- As a workaround I have already come up with this: __attribute__((stdcall)) long DriverEntry(void *DriverObject, void *RegistryPath) asm("DriverEntry"); __attribute__((stdcall)) long DriverEntry(void *DriverO

[Bug ld/30144] LD --entry does not accept function name

2023-04-12 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30144 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1