Re: [cc65] Strange things happen with segments after BSS

From: Ullrich von Bassewitz <uz1musoftware.de>
Date: 2005-11-20 13:22:57
Sorry for the delay, I've catched a cold and was mostly staying in bed the
last few days.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 06:02:01PM +0100, MagerValp wrote:
> Yeah... I've tried to make a minimal test case, but it doesn't seem to
> trigger easily. I can send you my sources if you want.

That would be nice.

> Well, it's not the last segment, since TILEDATA follows. If BSS
> simply wasn't written to the file, TILEDATA should be moved $614
> bytes, not just 61.

What I meant was "last segment in memory area". After the last segment of a
memory area has been handled, the "fill" attribute is evaluated. If this
attribute is true, it shouldn't matter if the last segment was a bss segment
or not, because what was not written would be filled in the next step. At
least in theory ...

> No, the map file still thinks that tile_bmp_tab_lo starts at $ae80,
> when it actually starts at $ae43.

You have to be careful here, because file positions and "relocated to"
positions do not necessarily match.

Regards


        Uz


-- 
Ullrich von Bassewitz                                  uz@musoftware.de
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
Received on Sun Nov 20 13:23:06 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-11-20 13:23:09 CET