From: Ullrich von Bassewitz (uz_at_musoftware.de)
Date: 2002-10-24 21:04:58
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 06:57:03PM +0200, groepaz_at_gmx.net wrote:
> i'd suggest some kind of flexible interface there.... since there is not
> only pucrunch, but also the exomizer (which is _better_ than pucrunch ;=)) and a
> bunch of other little packers which might be useful.
Agreed.
> btw while we are at it.... some way to get rid of the dodgy cbm-style
> loadadress as defined in c64.cfg and moving the .bin=>.prg conversion into a
> seperated tool would also be quite useful.... for once, removing the good old
> alignment issue - and also making compilation of ROMs (which do not need the
> loadadress "header") easier.
Just change the startup and linker config files. The necessary changes are
rather simple. It's sometimes difficult to choose the correct default
behaviour, but in this case I'm pretty sure that I've choosen the right one.
Experienced coders (like yourself) shouldn't have a problem with the changes
needed to support other configurations. I don't know who said "make simple
things simple and difficult things possible", but I think it fits here:-)
Regards
Uz
--
Ullrich von Bassewitz uz_at_musoftware.de
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2002-10-24 21:05:09 CEST