Re: COFF questions

"Norman Black" <stonybrk@fubar.com>
1 Mar 2001 02:35:24 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
COFF questions xl@xaff.org (Xavier Leclercq) (2001-02-23)
Re: COFF questions broeker@physik.rwth-aachen.de (Hans-Bernhard Broeker) (2001-02-25)
Re: COFF questions joewhaley@hotmail.com (John Whaley) (2001-02-25)
Re: COFF questions rhyde@transdimension.com (Randall Hyde) (2001-03-01)
Re: COFF questions stonybrk@fubar.com (Norman Black) (2001-03-01)
COFF questions jm@egr.duke.edu (Jeffrey B. Messinger) (1991-02-11)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Norman Black" <stonybrk@fubar.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 1 Mar 2001 02:35:24 -0500
Organization: Stony Brook Software
References: 01-02-111
Keywords: linker
Posted-Date: 01 Mar 2001 02:35:24 EST

> I have the Microsoft specification. There seem to be some errors in it.


For structures and constants use the header files. The docs may have
typos and/or errors. Microsoft COFF only differs from "normal" COFF in
regards to optional headers. Compiler output usually never has these
optional headers, and they are used in executables, which for Win32 is
the MS PE format.


Almost 10 years ago I implemented COFF in my compiler using the
OReilly COFF book, out of print, and all I needed to be functional
were the values of various constants, which are implementation
specific.


> 1) In section 4.1. the value for IMAGE_SCN_MEM_PURGEABLE and
> IMAGE_SCN_MEM_16BIT is the same. Is this correct or is this an error ?


It probably is an error. 16BIT is never used for anything I know of.


> 2) Also, in section 5.4.3. If I understand correctly the value for a
> function should be 0x200 (MSB : 0x02, LSB : 0x00). However, the say in
> the same section that it is 0x20.


IMAGE_SYM_TYPE_FUNCTION is 0x20
--
Norman Black
Stony Brook Software
the reply, fubar => ix.netcom


"Xavier Leclercq" <xl@xaff.org> wrote in message
> I have several questions about the COFF format.
> I have the Microsoft specification. There seem to be some errors in it.
>
> 1) In section 4.1. the value for IMAGE_SCN_MEM_PURGEABLE and
> IMAGE_SCN_MEM_16BIT is the same. Is this correct or is this an error ?
>
> 2) Also, in section 5.4.3. If I understand correctly the value for a
> function should be 0x200 (MSB : 0x02, LSB : 0x00). However, the say in
> the same section that it is 0x20.
>
> Do you know where I can find other COFF spec (for the System V R3 e.g.)

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.