Re: Is anyone interested in old dump code?
- First Post
- Replies
- Stats
-
Go to
- ----- 2024 -----
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2023 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2022 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2021 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2020 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2019 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2018 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2017 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2016 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2015 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2014 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2013 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2012 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2011 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2010 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2009 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2008 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2007 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2006 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2005 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2004 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2003 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2002 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2001 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2000 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1999 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1998 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
Yoshiki Hayashi <yoshiki(a)xemacs.org> writes:
These are diff between FSF Emacs 20.6.90 and current XEmacs
21.2.
Just by looking at the patch..
+/* Return the index of the section named NAME.
+ SECTION_NAMES, FILE_NAME and FILE_H give information
+ about the file we are looking in.
+
+ If we don't find the section NAME, that is a fatal error
+ if NOERROR is 0; we return -1 if NOERROR is nonzero. */
+
+static int
+find_section (name, section_names, file_name, old_file_h, old_section_h, noerror)
Although defining this function is a good idea, it does not change the
effect of the code...
+
+ if (old_sbss_index != -1)
+ if (!strcmp (old_section_names + NEW_SECTION_H (nn).sh_name, ".sbss"))
+ {
+ NEW_SECTION_H (nn).sh_offset =
+ round_up (NEW_SECTION_H (nn).sh_offset,
+ NEW_SECTION_H (nn).sh_addralign);
+ NEW_SECTION_H (nn).sh_type = SHT_PROGBITS;
+ }
This seems to be the only new part.
Are there any ChangeLog entries describing the changes? Are there any
platforms where we are currently failing?
Given the problems we had with the "Linux processor type problem" I am
a bit weary of syncing just for syncing sake.
Jan
Yoshiki Hayashi
Monday, 29 May
Mon, 29 May
4:49 a.m.
New subject: Is anyone interested in old dump code?
Jan Vroonhof <vroonhof(a)math.ethz.ch> writes:
> +/* Return the index of the section named NAME.
> + SECTION_NAMES, FILE_NAME and FILE_H give information
> + about the file we are looking in.
> +
> + If we don't find the section NAME, that is a fatal error
> + if NOERROR is 0; we return -1 if NOERROR is nonzero. */
> +
> +static int
> +find_section (name, section_names, file_name, old_file_h, old_section_h, noerror)
Although defining this function is a good idea, it does not change the
effect of the code...
To my surprise, XEmacs 21.1 has find_section but XEmacs 21.2
does not.
> +
> + if (old_sbss_index != -1)
> + if (!strcmp (old_section_names + NEW_SECTION_H (nn).sh_name, ".sbss"))
> + {
> + NEW_SECTION_H (nn).sh_offset =
> + round_up (NEW_SECTION_H (nn).sh_offset,
> + NEW_SECTION_H (nn).sh_addralign);
> + NEW_SECTION_H (nn).sh_type = SHT_PROGBITS;
> + }
This seems to be the only new part.
Are there any ChangeLog entries describing the changes? Are there any
platforms where we are currently failing?
These are the only parts they mentioned about unexelf.
1. This pretest contains a new unexelf.c again, due to problems on
some GNU/Linux systems. If you are running a system that uses
unexelf.c, please try to build Emacs with all compilers you have
access to, esp. older versions of GCC and GCC 2.95.x.
2000-05-15 Gerd Moellmann <gerd(a)gnu.org>
* unexelf.c, m/iris4d.h, m/iris5d.h: Use most current development
versions.
--
Yoshiki Hayashi
8943
days inactive
8946
days old
2 comments
3 participants
tags (0)
participants (3)
-
Giacomo Boffi -
Jan Vroonhof -
Yoshiki Hayashi