Hi! On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 08:49:11PM +0200, Oliver Schmidt wrote: > > 2) No, because the built-in configure-code _is_ "hard-wiring". We do not > > want the "-t" option to force people to stuff an artificial "_main:" label > > into their purely assembly-coded programs. > > Do you really see purely assembly-coded programs using built-in Linker > configs (with their multiple obligatory segments etc.) ? I've checked the possibility of adding such a linker config option and - for now - it's too much work. The linker config is read *after* the command line is parsed and all object files and libraries are read. At that point, all modules that should be linked are already determined. Adding an additional import in this stage is not possible. Changing the order (reading the config before all other stuff) is not easily possible, since it relies on information from the modules. So I've added a linker command line option "--force-import" instead. As a nice side effect, this does also spare us the discussion about having a forced import of "_main" in the builtin linker or not. For applications that have main() in a library, just add "--force-import _main" (or "--force-import __STARTUP__") to the linker or cl65 command line, and things should be ok. 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 Thu Aug 27 17:40:52 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2009-08-27 17:40:55 CEST