Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #384794 > unrolled thread
| Started by | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-05-22 18:55 +0200 |
| Last post | 2024-05-25 16:05 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 542 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-22 18:55 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 14:42 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-22 22:11 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 17:26 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-23 14:17 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 09:38 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-23 17:08 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 16:06 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-23 15:11 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 13:21 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 14:49 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-24 11:03 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 14:17 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 12:45 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 17:06 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 13:19 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 21:27 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 17:46 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-25 08:33 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-25 16:51 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-25 16:34 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-25 13:05 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-25 08:19 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-25 17:14 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-26 02:09 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-06-06 15:01 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 15:53 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 22:21 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-23 13:11 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 09:43 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-24 16:19 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-23 15:25 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 13:06 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-24 15:45 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 18:29 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-25 13:11 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-25 15:58 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-26 13:09 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-26 12:51 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-26 16:18 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-26 16:25 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-26 19:35 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-26 19:01 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-26 23:26 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-26 22:27 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 19:19 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-26 23:06 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-27 00:49 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 19:54 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-27 11:10 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-26 23:59 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-26 22:52 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 16:20 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-27 00:48 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-27 11:05 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 10:12 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 16:17 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-27 13:42 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-27 17:33 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-28 13:52 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 13:21 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-28 23:37 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-29 10:02 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-14 14:30 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-14 23:39 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-15 19:17 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-15 20:27 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-15 22:39 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-16 00:20 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-16 01:16 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-06-16 12:31 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-17 00:03 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-16 16:54 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-16 20:00 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-17 10:49 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-17 13:18 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-15 17:58 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-15 22:37 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-16 16:55 +0200
Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-16 16:48 -0700
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-17 11:42 +0200
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-17 17:19 -0700
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-18 04:19 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-17 22:39 -0700
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-18 15:54 +0200
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-18 15:00 -0700
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-19 09:37 +0200
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-06-19 10:17 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-19 13:44 +0300
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-19 11:57 +0100
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-19 13:46 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-19 18:02 +0300
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-19 07:25 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-19 10:49 +0200
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-21 07:13 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-21 13:06 +0200
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-21 22:48 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-22 13:40 +0200
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-06-21 10:15 -0400
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-19 02:32 -0700
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-18 04:19 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-06-17 11:41 +0100
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-06-17 14:57 +0100
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-17 18:57 -0700
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-18 08:12 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-06-18 16:14 +0100
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-17 14:21 +0100
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-17 19:20 -0700
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-17 22:39 -0700
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-18 12:39 +0300
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-18 11:28 +0100
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-18 11:12 -0700
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-18 17:20 +0200
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-18 11:04 -0700
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-20 06:51 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-06-18 09:50 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-18 13:56 +0000
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-18 17:21 +0200
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-06-18 19:25 +0100
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-06-18 19:38 +0100
Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-21 22:49 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-28 00:20 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-27 17:59 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-28 15:42 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 13:44 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 05:36 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-28 15:53 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-27 00:44 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-27 01:55 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-27 02:48 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-27 14:03 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-28 02:45 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-28 11:30 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-29 04:17 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 06:00 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 13:58 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 17:20 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-30 02:32 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-30 11:09 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-30 13:43 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-01 01:45 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-30 14:34 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-30 17:08 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-30 15:48 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-30 18:03 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-31 13:55 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-31 16:19 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-31 16:28 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-31 16:48 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-31 15:04 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-31 17:34 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-31 19:03 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-31 18:36 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-31 22:15 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-01 01:25 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-01 11:24 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-01 05:17 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-01 15:08 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-01 17:22 -0700
objcopy -I binary etc... Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-06 14:56 +0300
Re: objcopy -I binary etc... Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-06 07:44 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-01 22:51 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-01 15:24 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-01 19:59 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-04 04:00 +0000
Re: Correct objcopy Usage (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-04 04:33 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-06-01 03:37 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-01 11:09 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-06-01 13:59 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-01 17:26 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-02 01:11 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-02 00:39 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-02 03:06 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-06 14:43 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-31 21:42 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-31 21:11 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB-Alt <bohannonindustriesllc@gmail.com> - 2024-06-06 15:38 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-06 21:38 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-07 00:51 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-07 09:04 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-07 10:20 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-07 10:22 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-07 00:53 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB-Alt <bohannonindustriesllc@gmail.com> - 2024-06-07 16:58 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-08 03:08 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-08 00:04 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-08 08:27 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-06-13 14:14 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-13 14:07 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-06-14 08:53 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-14 03:13 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-06-14 10:26 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-14 03:38 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-15 22:42 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-15 20:42 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-16 03:15 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-08 13:09 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-09 00:46 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-09 11:19 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-06-08 19:28 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-08 14:52 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-09 12:40 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-09 11:20 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-09 14:12 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-09 14:44 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-09 17:32 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-09 20:00 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-09 21:06 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-09 23:40 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-09 22:49 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-10 01:06 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-10 01:26 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-11 08:33 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-09 21:12 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-09 00:45 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-31 22:17 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-01 21:11 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-01 17:47 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-31 15:03 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-05-31 15:34 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 20:31 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 01:53 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-01 11:53 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 16:51 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-31 09:24 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-31 13:39 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-31 13:31 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-30 17:51 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-01 01:39 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-01 11:37 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-02 03:27 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-02 10:37 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 01:16 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-03 11:16 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-04 02:10 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-04 12:28 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-05 01:51 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-04 19:45 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-03 11:13 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-04 02:12 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-04 12:35 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-05 01:50 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-05 09:10 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-06-05 09:23 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-05 15:09 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-06 02:12 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-06 19:38 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-07 00:55 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-07 22:23 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-06-08 00:39 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-08 02:14 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-06-08 03:55 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-08 11:14 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-06-07 22:36 -0700
xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-28 14:41 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-28 15:06 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-28 17:42 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-28 18:56 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-28 18:14 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-28 19:20 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-28 19:57 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-28 23:23 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 00:45 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-29 01:29 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 09:21 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 12:44 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-28 23:08 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 01:24 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-30 02:35 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-05-30 00:40 -0400
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-30 10:40 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-05-30 14:04 -0400
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-30 22:31 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-05-31 15:20 -0400
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-30 19:47 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 03:15 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-03 08:57 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 07:59 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-03 11:02 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-06-03 14:41 -0400
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-04 02:07 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-30 14:41 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-29 00:54 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-29 10:32 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 13:08 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-29 14:10 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 15:27 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-29 15:19 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 14:38 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 15:43 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 14:57 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 07:54 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 17:27 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-29 19:27 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-05-29 14:07 -0400
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 22:59 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 22:46 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-30 01:18 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 02:31 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-30 12:23 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 14:40 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 14:21 -0700
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 16:41 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 08:31 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-05-30 00:06 -0400
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-30 13:31 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-30 15:15 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-30 16:09 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 08:29 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 16:50 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2024-05-30 16:00 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 18:28 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 03:10 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-30 10:01 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-30 11:33 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-30 12:13 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-30 14:14 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 07:51 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 03:12 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-03 10:57 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 12:38 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-29 12:23 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 15:23 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-29 15:16 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-29 18:32 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-29 18:41 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-29 21:31 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 07:49 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-03 13:01 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-29 10:18 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-28 17:34 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-29 22:08 +0100
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-30 15:05 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-05-30 14:20 -0400
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 12:27 -0700
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-31 09:55 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-31 13:45 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-31 13:33 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-02 04:19 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-02 13:40 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-02 04:16 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 18:39 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-04 02:07 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-06-04 04:46 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-04 03:58 +0000
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-04 09:52 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-04 11:01 +0300
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-06-04 10:34 +0200
Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-06-03 22:46 -0400
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 13:54 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 01:03 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-06-12 20:32 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 22:23 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-23 02:59 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 21:08 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-23 04:20 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-23 04:47 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 21:30 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 07:29 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-23 14:32 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 13:37 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-23 15:31 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-05-23 20:23 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-24 16:25 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-23 20:31 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 14:28 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-23 17:10 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-23 15:43 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-23 02:49 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-23 16:40 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-23 15:36 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 14:24 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-23 15:35 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 16:05 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 16:17 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-24 16:50 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 11:08 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 11:21 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-25 13:22 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-24 23:51 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-23 03:13 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-23 15:42 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-05-23 14:35 -0400
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 09:40 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-24 17:10 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 12:29 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-25 13:29 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-25 16:21 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-26 16:15 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-23 15:02 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-23 15:56 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB-Alt <bohannonindustriesllc@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 17:15 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-23 17:37 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-24 12:05 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-24 06:54 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-24 18:46 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-25 03:01 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-23 17:19 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-23 22:10 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-24 00:34 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-24 01:06 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 07:47 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-25 00:31 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 06:38 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-24 05:42 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-24 11:42 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-23 18:35 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 19:42 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-23 20:28 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-24 17:57 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-24 16:16 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-25 16:41 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-24 19:22 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-24 19:38 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 13:06 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-24 21:20 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-25 00:32 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-25 17:28 +0200
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-25 00:40 +0000
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-25 17:47 +0200
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-25 16:45 -0700
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-26 16:18 +0200
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 09:48 -0500
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-26 18:12 +0200
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-28 02:48 +0000
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 01:31 -0500
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-05-29 11:27 -0400
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) BGB-Alt <bohannonindustriesllc@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 14:18 -0500
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-28 13:56 +0200
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-27 20:26 -0700
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-05-26 18:59 -0400
Re: errno (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative?) BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-05-25 15:23 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 14:38 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions - why so conservative? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-24 00:48 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 21:25 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 16:49 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 07:36 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-24 09:32 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 18:34 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-26 09:13 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 13:23 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-27 00:55 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 18:34 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-01 01:27 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-02 11:02 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-02 14:03 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-02 16:29 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-02 19:23 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-02 21:44 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-03 12:00 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-03 18:34 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-03 16:50 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-03 21:05 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-03 19:38 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-03 22:58 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-03 21:22 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-06-04 05:17 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-04 11:23 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-04 10:25 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-04 13:30 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-04 12:48 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-04 19:17 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB-Alt <bohannonindustriesllc@gmail.com> - 2024-06-04 17:32 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-05 07:22 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-05 07:14 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-05 04:01 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-07 00:57 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-07 02:52 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-14 03:20 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-05 07:15 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-05 13:32 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-06-05 13:59 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-07 00:59 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-06-04 05:12 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-04 06:55 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-02 19:15 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 12:46 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-03 03:21 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-03 14:16 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-03 13:23 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-04 13:46 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-04 19:21 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-04 20:44 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-06-04 23:59 -0400
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-05 00:44 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-06-05 13:29 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-06-05 13:49 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-03 21:14 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-01 15:28 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 16:33 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-02 03:28 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-05-25 21:24 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-26 08:32 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 02:48 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-26 13:44 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-26 15:39 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-26 15:46 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-26 17:20 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-26 16:29 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-26 18:05 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-26 18:26 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-26 19:50 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-28 05:41 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-28 10:46 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-26 17:10 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-26 18:23 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-26 19:23 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-26 18:36 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-26 19:11 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 16:30 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-27 10:45 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-28 05:45 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 13:53 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-05-26 21:16 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-27 07:14 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-27 00:53 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-05-26 21:03 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-26 08:44 +0200
Don't let the door hit you... (Was: C23 thoughts and opinions) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-05-23 19:58 +0000
Re: Don't let the door hit you... (Was: C23 thoughts and opinions) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 18:35 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 17:55 -0500
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-01 15:30 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-02 03:29 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 23:31 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-06-02 13:24 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2024-06-02 16:51 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-06-02 19:52 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-06-03 12:01 +0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-03 13:31 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 14:02 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-06-03 21:48 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-04 10:36 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-06-04 14:47 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-06-03 23:43 +0100
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 16:23 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-04 10:47 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-06-04 02:20 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-04 10:47 +0200
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-06-04 05:25 +0000
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-03 13:29 -0700
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 21:35 -0300
Re: C23 thoughts and opinions BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-05-25 16:05 -0500
Page 12 of 28 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 … 28 Next page →
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-05-31 20:31 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <v3d8iu$2c2oq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385351 |
On 31/05/2024 13:55, bart wrote:
> On 30/05/2024 16:03, Michael S wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 May 2024 15:48:39 +0100
>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Where do the _binary_logo_bmp_start and ...-size symbols come from?
>>> That is, how do they get into the object file.
>>>
>>
>> objcopy generates names of the symbols from the name of input binary
>> file. I would think that it is possible to change these symbols to
>> something else, but I am not sure that it is possible withing the same
>> invocation of objcopy. It certainly is possible with a second pass.
>> Lawrence probably can give more authoritative answer.
>> Or as a last resort you can RTFM.
>>
> I gave myself the simple task of incorporating the source text of
> hello.c into a program, and printing it out.
>
> My C program looked like this to start, as an initial test (ignoring
> declaring the size as an array, unless I had to):
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> typedef unsigned char byte;
>
> extern byte _binary_hello_c_start[];
> extern int _binary_hello_c_size;
>
> int main(void) {
> printf("%d\n", _binary_hello_c_size);
> }
>
> One small matter is those ugly, long identifiers. A bigger one in this
> case is that I really want that embedded text to be zero terminated;
> here it's unlikely to be.
>
> However I still have to create the object file with the data. I tried this:
>
> objcopy -I binary -O pe-x86-64 hello.c hello.obj
>
> The contents looked about right when I looked inside.
>
> Now to build my program. Because my C compiler can't link object files
> itself, I have to get it to generate an object file for the program,
> then use an external linker:
>
> C:\c>mcc -c c.c
> Compiling c.c to c.obj
>
> C:\c>gcc c.obj hello.obj
> hello.obj: file not recognized: file format not recognized
> collect2.exe: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>
> Unfortunately gcc/ld doesn't recognise the output of objcopy. Even
> though it accepts the output of mcc which is the same COFF format.
>
> But even if it worked, you can see it would be a bit of a palaver.
>
> Here's how builtin embedding worked using a feature of my older C compiler:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <string.h>
>
> char hello[] = strinclude("hello.c");
>
> int main(void) {
> printf("hello =\n%s\n", hello);
> printf("strlen(hello) = %zu\n", strlen(hello));
> printf("sizeof(hello) = %zu\n", sizeof(hello));
> }
>
>
> I build it and run it like this:
>
> C:\c>bcc c
> Compiling c.c to c.exe
>
> C:\c>c
> hello =
> #include "stdio.h"
>
> int main(void) {
> printf("Hello, World!\n");
> }
>
> strlen(hello) = 70
> sizeof(hello) = 71
>
> C:\c>dir hello.c
> 31/05/2024 13:48 70 hello.c
>
>
> It just works; no messing about with objcopy parameters; no long
> unwieldy names; no link errors due to unsupported file formats; no
> problems with missing terminators for embedded text files imported as
> strings; no funny ways of getting size info.
>
Now that is perfect use of the BabyX resource compiler. The programs to
incorporate directories as C strings in C programs and mount them are
just going in. And I'm sure that with a bit of work I could set up some
sort of system to make it easy to trawl the source tree of a program and
icorpoorste its own source into it. Though you do have the problem that
the XML of the source tree is itself source, and so of course this has
to be excluded , or you get a problem of infinite self-reference.
--
Check out Basic Algorithms and my other books:
https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/bgy1mm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-01 01:53 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <v3drdg$2f1pg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385351 |
On 31/05/2024 13:55, bart wrote:
> On 30/05/2024 16:03, Michael S wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 May 2024 15:48:39 +0100
>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Where do the _binary_logo_bmp_start and ...-size symbols come from?
>>> That is, how do they get into the object file.
>>>
>>
>> objcopy generates names of the symbols from the name of input binary
>> file. I would think that it is possible to change these symbols to
>> something else, but I am not sure that it is possible withing the same
>> invocation of objcopy. It certainly is possible with a second pass.
>> Lawrence probably can give more authoritative answer.
>> Or as a last resort you can RTFM.
>>
> I gave myself the simple task of incorporating the source text of
> hello.c into a program, and printing it out.
>
> Here's how builtin embedding worked using a feature of my older C compiler:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <string.h>
>
> char hello[] = strinclude("hello.c");
>
> int main(void) {
> printf("hello =\n%s\n", hello);
> printf("strlen(hello) = %zu\n", strlen(hello));
> printf("sizeof(hello) = %zu\n", sizeof(hello));
> }
>
>
> I build it and run it like this:
>
> C:\c>bcc c
> Compiling c.c to c.exe
>
> C:\c>c
> hello =
> #include "stdio.h"
>
> int main(void) {
> printf("Hello, World!\n");
> }
>
> strlen(hello) = 70
> sizeof(hello) = 71
>
> C:\c>dir hello.c
> 31/05/2024 13:48 70 hello.c
>
>
> It just works; no messing about with objcopy parameters; no long
> unwieldy names; no link errors due to unsupported file formats; no
> problems with missing terminators for embedded text files imported as
> strings; no funny ways of getting size info.
>
Here's my solution. It's a bit more complicated.
int bbx_write_source (const char *source_xml, char *path, const char
*source_xml_file, const char *source_xml_name)
{
XMLDOC *doc = 0;
char error[1024];
char buff[1024];
XMLNODE *root;
XMLNODE *node;
const char *name;
FILE *fpout;
FILE *fpin;
int ch;
doc = xmldocfromstring(source_xml, error, 1024);
if (!doc)
{
fprintf(stderr, "%s\n", error);
return -1;
}
root = xml_getroot(doc);
if (strcmp(xml_gettag(root), "FileSystem"))
return -1;
if (!root->child)
return -1;
if (strcmp(xml_gettag(root->child), "directory"))
return -1;
for (node = root->child->child; node != NULL; node = node->next)
{
if (!strcmp(xml_gettag(node), "file"))
{
name = xml_getattribute(node, "name");
snprintf(buff, 1024, "%s%s", path, name);
fpout = fopen(buff, "w");
if (!fpout)
break;
fpin = file_fopen(node);
if (!fpin)
break;
if (!strcmp(name, source_xml_file))
{
char *escaped = texttostring(source_xml);
if (!escaped)
break;
fprintf(fpout, "char %s[] = %s;\n", source_xml_name,
escaped);
free(escaped);
}
else
{
while ((ch = fgetc(fpin)) != EOF)
fputc(ch, fpout);
}
fclose(fpout);
fclose(fpin);
fpout = 0;
fpin = 0;
}
}
if (fpin || fpout)
{
fclose(fpin);
fclose(fpout);
return -1;
}
return 0;
}
It's leveraging the Baby X resource compiler, the xmparser, and my
filesystem programs. You can't include the source of a program in the
program as a C string, because then the source changes to include that
string. So what you do is this.
You first place a placeholder C source file containing a short dummy string.
The you convert the source to an XML file, and turn it into a string
with the Baby X Resource compiler. Then you drop the source into the
file, removing the placeholder.
Then the program walks the file list, detects that file, and replaces it
with the xml string it has been passed.
And this system works, and it's an easy way of adding source output to
ptograms. Of course the function now needs to be modified to walk the
entire tree recursively and I will need a makedirectory function. I've
got it to work for flat source directories.
--
Check out Basic Algorithms and my other books:
https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/bgy1mm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-01 11:53 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <v3euis$2o6gv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385374 |
On 01/06/2024 01:53, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On 31/05/2024 13:55, bart wrote:
>> On 30/05/2024 16:03, Michael S wrote:
>>> On Thu, 30 May 2024 15:48:39 +0100
>>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where do the _binary_logo_bmp_start and ...-size symbols come from?
>>>> That is, how do they get into the object file.
>>>>
>>>
>>> objcopy generates names of the symbols from the name of input binary
>>> file. I would think that it is possible to change these symbols to
>>> something else, but I am not sure that it is possible withing the same
>>> invocation of objcopy. It certainly is possible with a second pass.
>>> Lawrence probably can give more authoritative answer.
>>> Or as a last resort you can RTFM.
>>>
>> I gave myself the simple task of incorporating the source text of
>> hello.c into a program, and printing it out.
>>
>> Here's how builtin embedding worked using a feature of my older C
>> compiler:
>>
>> #include <stdio.h>
>> #include <string.h>
>>
>> char hello[] = strinclude("hello.c");
>>
>> int main(void) {
>> printf("hello =\n%s\n", hello);
>> printf("strlen(hello) = %zu\n", strlen(hello));
>> printf("sizeof(hello) = %zu\n", sizeof(hello));
>> }
>>
>>
>> I build it and run it like this:
>>
>> C:\c>bcc c
>> Compiling c.c to c.exe
>>
>> C:\c>c
>> hello =
>> #include "stdio.h"
>>
>> int main(void) {
>> printf("Hello, World!\n");
>> }
>>
>> strlen(hello) = 70
>> sizeof(hello) = 71
>>
>> C:\c>dir hello.c
>> 31/05/2024 13:48 70 hello.c
>>
>>
>> It just works; no messing about with objcopy parameters; no long
>> unwieldy names; no link errors due to unsupported file formats; no
>> problems with missing terminators for embedded text files imported as
>> strings; no funny ways of getting size info.
>>
> Here's my solution. It's a bit more complicated.
>
>
> int bbx_write_source (const char *source_xml, char *path, const char
> *source_xml_file, const char *source_xml_name)
> {
> XMLDOC *doc = 0;
> char error[1024];
> char buff[1024];
> XMLNODE *root;
> XMLNODE *node;
> const char *name;
> FILE *fpout;
> FILE *fpin;
> int ch;
>
> doc = xmldocfromstring(source_xml, error, 1024);
> if (!doc)
> {
> fprintf(stderr, "%s\n", error);
> return -1;
> }
> root = xml_getroot(doc);
> if (strcmp(xml_gettag(root), "FileSystem"))
> return -1;
>
> if (!root->child)
> return -1;
> if (strcmp(xml_gettag(root->child), "directory"))
> return -1;
>
> for (node = root->child->child; node != NULL; node = node->next)
> {
> if (!strcmp(xml_gettag(node), "file"))
> {
> name = xml_getattribute(node, "name");
> snprintf(buff, 1024, "%s%s", path, name);
> fpout = fopen(buff, "w");
> if (!fpout)
> break;
> fpin = file_fopen(node);
> if (!fpin)
> break;
> if (!strcmp(name, source_xml_file))
> {
> char *escaped = texttostring(source_xml);
> if (!escaped)
> break;
> fprintf(fpout, "char %s[] = %s;\n", source_xml_name,
> escaped);
> free(escaped);
> }
> else
> {
> while ((ch = fgetc(fpin)) != EOF)
> fputc(ch, fpout);
> }
> fclose(fpout);
> fclose(fpin);
> fpout = 0;
> fpin = 0;
> }
> }
> if (fpin || fpout)
> {
> fclose(fpin);
> fclose(fpout);
> return -1;
> }
>
> return 0;
>
> }
>
> It's leveraging the Baby X resource compiler, the xmparser, and my
> filesystem programs. You can't include the source of a program in the
> program as a C string, because then the source changes to include that
> string. So what you do is this.
>
> You first place a placeholder C source file containing a short dummy
> string.
> The you convert the source to an XML file, and turn it into a string
> with the Baby X Resource compiler. Then you drop the source into the
> file, removing the placeholder.
>
> Then the program walks the file list, detects that file, and replaces it
> with the xml string it has been passed.
>
> And this system works, and it's an easy way of adding source output to
> ptograms. Of course the function now needs to be modified to walk the
> entire tree recursively and I will need a makedirectory function. I've
> got it to work for flat source directories.
Sorry, I don't understand what that does; what is the input and what is
the output?
In the case of a very simple requirement of incorporating a text file
into a C program as data, usually string data (which I have to say is
much more common for me than doing anything with XML), how would a BBX
solution work?
This doesn't work:
char strdata[] = {
#include "file.txt"
}
Because the contents of file.txt, which let's say are:
one
two
three
are interpreted as C source code ('one' is a syntax error, or it might
be the name of some identifier).
Some process is needed to either turn that file into:
"one\ntwo\nthree\n"
or into a bunch of numbers: '100, 110, 101, ...'. I think this is what
'xxd' does.
In the case of binary files, the process of embedding is usually blind
to the actual format, or meaning, of the file. It is just a blob of data.
So here, I understand that the BBXRC solution goes much further. If I
wanted to include a JPG file, then either #embed or my strinclude()
would just incorporate the raw bytes. I would still need a JPEG decoder
to use that data.
Whereas BBXRC, AIUI, does the decoding for you, and incorporates the
data as a raw table of pixel values that can be directly used.
So it is at a different level from what is being discussed. But
sometimes there is also a need for that cruder form of embedding: maybe
that JPG just needs to be written out again; no need to get inside it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-01 16:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <v3fg2m$2rkd2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385383 |
On 01/06/2024 11:53, bart wrote:
> On 01/06/2024 01:53, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>> On 31/05/2024 13:55, bart wrote:
>>> On 30/05/2024 16:03, Michael S wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 30 May 2024 15:48:39 +0100
>>>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Where do the _binary_logo_bmp_start and ...-size symbols come from?
>>>>> That is, how do they get into the object file.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> objcopy generates names of the symbols from the name of input binary
>>>> file. I would think that it is possible to change these symbols to
>>>> something else, but I am not sure that it is possible withing the same
>>>> invocation of objcopy. It certainly is possible with a second pass.
>>>> Lawrence probably can give more authoritative answer.
>>>> Or as a last resort you can RTFM.
>>>>
>>> I gave myself the simple task of incorporating the source text of
>>> hello.c into a program, and printing it out.
>>>
>>> Here's how builtin embedding worked using a feature of my older C
>>> compiler:
>>>
>>> #include <stdio.h>
>>> #include <string.h>
>>>
>>> char hello[] = strinclude("hello.c");
>>>
>>> int main(void) {
>>> printf("hello =\n%s\n", hello);
>>> printf("strlen(hello) = %zu\n", strlen(hello));
>>> printf("sizeof(hello) = %zu\n", sizeof(hello));
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> I build it and run it like this:
>>>
>>> C:\c>bcc c
>>> Compiling c.c to c.exe
>>>
>>> C:\c>c
>>> hello =
>>> #include "stdio.h"
>>>
>>> int main(void) {
>>> printf("Hello, World!\n");
>>> }
>>>
>>> strlen(hello) = 70
>>> sizeof(hello) = 71
>>>
>>> C:\c>dir hello.c
>>> 31/05/2024 13:48 70 hello.c
>>>
>>>
>>> It just works; no messing about with objcopy parameters; no long
>>> unwieldy names; no link errors due to unsupported file formats; no
>>> problems with missing terminators for embedded text files imported as
>>> strings; no funny ways of getting size info.
>>>
>> Here's my solution. It's a bit more complicated.
>>
>>
>> int bbx_write_source (const char *source_xml, char *path, const char
>> *source_xml_file, const char *source_xml_name)
>> {
>> XMLDOC *doc = 0;
>> char error[1024];
>> char buff[1024];
>> XMLNODE *root;
>> XMLNODE *node;
>> const char *name;
>> FILE *fpout;
>> FILE *fpin;
>> int ch;
>>
>> doc = xmldocfromstring(source_xml, error, 1024);
>> if (!doc)
>> {
>> fprintf(stderr, "%s\n", error);
>> return -1;
>> }
>> root = xml_getroot(doc);
>> if (strcmp(xml_gettag(root), "FileSystem"))
>> return -1;
>>
>> if (!root->child)
>> return -1;
>> if (strcmp(xml_gettag(root->child), "directory"))
>> return -1;
>>
>> for (node = root->child->child; node != NULL; node = node->next)
>> {
>> if (!strcmp(xml_gettag(node), "file"))
>> {
>> name = xml_getattribute(node, "name");
>> snprintf(buff, 1024, "%s%s", path, name);
>> fpout = fopen(buff, "w");
>> if (!fpout)
>> break;
>> fpin = file_fopen(node);
>> if (!fpin)
>> break;
>> if (!strcmp(name, source_xml_file))
>> {
>> char *escaped = texttostring(source_xml);
>> if (!escaped)
>> break;
>> fprintf(fpout, "char %s[] = %s;\n", source_xml_name,
>> escaped);
>> free(escaped);
>> }
>> else
>> {
>> while ((ch = fgetc(fpin)) != EOF)
>> fputc(ch, fpout);
>> }
>> fclose(fpout);
>> fclose(fpin);
>> fpout = 0;
>> fpin = 0;
>> }
>> }
>> if (fpin || fpout)
>> {
>> fclose(fpin);
>> fclose(fpout);
>> return -1;
>> }
>>
>> return 0;
>>
>> }
>>
>> It's leveraging the Baby X resource compiler, the xmparser, and my
>> filesystem programs. You can't include the source of a program in the
>> program as a C string, because then the source changes to include that
>> string. So what you do is this.
>>
>> You first place a placeholder C source file containing a short dummy
>> string.
>> The you convert the source to an XML file, and turn it into a string
>> with the Baby X Resource compiler. Then you drop the source into the
>> file, removing the placeholder.
>>
>> Then the program walks the file list, detects that file, and replaces
>> it with the xml string it has been passed.
>>
>> And this system works, and it's an easy way of adding source output to
>> ptograms. Of course the function now needs to be modified to walk the
>> entire tree recursively and I will need a makedirectory function. I've
>> got it to work for flat source directories.
>
> Sorry, I don't understand what that does; what is the input and what is
> the output?
>
> In the case of a very simple requirement of incorporating a text file
> into a C program as data, usually string data (which I have to say is
> much more common for me than doing anything with XML), how would a BBX
> solution work?
>
> This doesn't work:
>
> char strdata[] = {
> #include "file.txt"
> }
>
> Because the contents of file.txt, which let's say are:
>
> one
> two
> three
>
> are interpreted as C source code ('one' is a syntax error, or it might
> be the name of some identifier).
>
> Some process is needed to either turn that file into:
>
> "one\ntwo\nthree\n"
>
> or into a bunch of numbers: '100, 110, 101, ...'. I think this is what
> 'xxd' does.
>
> In the case of binary files, the process of embedding is usually blind
> to the actual format, or meaning, of the file. It is just a blob of data.
>
> So here, I understand that the BBXRC solution goes much further. If I
> wanted to include a JPG file, then either #embed or my strinclude()
> would just incorporate the raw bytes. I would still need a JPEG decoder
> to use that data.
>
> Whereas BBXRC, AIUI, does the decoding for you, and incorporates the
> data as a raw table of pixel values that can be directly used.
>
> So it is at a different level from what is being discussed. But
> sometimes there is also a need for that cruder form of embedding: maybe
> that JPG just needs to be written out again; no need to get inside it.
>
The Baby X resource compiler can of course do the trivial job of loading
binary data and writing it out as a C array of unsigned char. If that
was all it did, it would hardly be worth having. But is is an essential
facility for the program that it is.
But I've now got a much better solution for the problem of incorporating
entire directories, and I urge you to check it out.
And one directory you might want to include is your own source
directory. But thre is a problem. That image becomes part of the source,
and so there's a recursive self containment problem. But is is easily
solved.
You just put the source image in a file called source.c. Then you
replace source.c with a small placeholder, and convert the directory to
xml, then convert the xml to a string, which you put in a file called
source.c. Then you replace the placeholder with the real source.c, and
compile. Then when you process the XML, you look out for a file called
"source.c", which you know is a placeholder, and so you replace with the
contents of the string in source.c. And thus you have recreated your own
source directory.
And that's how I do it. And it works. And now I've just got to package
it up so it is as easy as possible, and every open source developer can
easily include a little flag in his binary to write out the source.
And can the Microsoft resource compiler compete with the Baby X resource
compiler on that? Let's see.
--
Check out Basic Algorithms and my other books:
https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/bgy1mm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-05-31 09:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <v3bu00$24lvl$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385315 |
On 30/05/2024 16:48, bart wrote: > On 30/05/2024 15:08, Michael S wrote: > >> Replace elf32-little with relevant format for your software. However I >> am not sure that it would work for none-elf output formats. > > > There appears to be an objcopy utility that runs under Windows. > objcopy can handle lots of formats, as source or target, and can run on any general OS host. So the question is not if you can get objcopy that runs on Windows, it is whether you can use this kind of blob-to-object-file conversion with the output in the Windows object file format in the same was as you can for elf formats. You know vastly more about the Windows object file formats than I do, so maybe you can answer this yourself.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-05-31 13:39 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <20240531133949.00004407@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #385343 |
On Fri, 31 May 2024 09:24:48 +0200 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > On 30/05/2024 16:48, bart wrote: > > On 30/05/2024 15:08, Michael S wrote: > > > >> Replace elf32-little with relevant format for your software. > >> However I am not sure that it would work for none-elf output > >> formats. > > > > > > There appears to be an objcopy utility that runs under Windows. > > > > objcopy can handle lots of formats, as source or target, and can run > on any general OS host. So the question is not if you can get > objcopy that runs on Windows, it is whether you can use this kind of > blob-to-object-file conversion with the output in the Windows object > file format in the same was as you can for elf formats. That's quite strange question. You mean, you are able to imagine object file format uncapable to represent initialized data array? > You know > vastly more about the Windows object file formats than I do, so maybe > you can answer this yourself. > objcopy supplied with msys2 appear to have bug in -O selection handling, but fortunately there exists an easy workaround. Read my post below if you are interested.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-05-31 13:31 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <v3ccdu$273pb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385346 |
On 31/05/2024 12:39, Michael S wrote: > On Fri, 31 May 2024 09:24:48 +0200 > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > >> On 30/05/2024 16:48, bart wrote: >>> On 30/05/2024 15:08, Michael S wrote: >>> >>>> Replace elf32-little with relevant format for your software. >>>> However I am not sure that it would work for none-elf output >>>> formats. >>> >>> >>> There appears to be an objcopy utility that runs under Windows. >>> >> >> objcopy can handle lots of formats, as source or target, and can run >> on any general OS host. So the question is not if you can get >> objcopy that runs on Windows, it is whether you can use this kind of >> blob-to-object-file conversion with the output in the Windows object >> file format in the same was as you can for elf formats. > > That's quite strange question. > You mean, you are able to imagine object file format uncapable to > represent initialized data array? > I'm sure I could imagine such a format, but I suppose it is quite unlikely! >> You know >> vastly more about the Windows object file formats than I do, so maybe >> you can answer this yourself. >> > > objcopy supplied with msys2 appear to have bug in -O selection handling, > but fortunately there exists an easy workaround. Read my post below if > you are interested. > OK, a bug in a particular version or build of objcopy sounds a lot more likely than a perversely restricted object code format.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-05-30 17:51 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <20240530175107.00001dc2@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #385313 |
On Thu, 30 May 2024 17:08:36 +0300 Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Thu, 30 May 2024 14:34:00 +0100 > bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > > > On 30/05/2024 03:32, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > > > On Wed, 29 May 2024 13:58:20 +0200, Bonita Montero wrote: > > > > > >> I've got a small commandline-tool that makes a const'd char > > >> -array from any binary file. > > > > > > It seems to me it would be more efficient to use objcopy to turn > > > that binary file directly into an object file with symbols > > > accessible from C code defining its beginning and ending points. > > > Then just link it into the executable. > > > > None of my compilers, whether for C or anything else, generate > > object files. > > > > However, suppose I wanted to link a file called 'logo.bmp' say, into > > my program, which consisted of a file called main.c. > > > > What is the entire process using your suggestion? What do I put > > into main.c? Assume the data is represented by a char-array. > > > > extern unsigned char _binary_logo_bmp_start[]; > extern unsigned char _binary_logo_bmp_size[]; > > The first symbol is an array itself. > The seconded symbol contains the length of array. You use it in > somewhat non-intuitive way: > size_t my_size = (size_t)_binary_logo_bmp_size; > > Pay attention that I never used this method myself, just took a look > at the output of objcopy with 'objdump -t', so please don't take my > words as a sure thing. > > BTW, options in this case are rather simple: > objcopy -I binary -O elf32-little logo.bmp logo_bmp.o > Replace elf32-little with relevant format for your software. However I > am not sure that it would work for none-elf output formats. > Tested it. On msys2 it can produce correct pe-x86-64 format but does it in counter-intuitive way: you have to ask for elf64-x86-64 instead of pe-x86-64. I don't know why it works like that. The rest of what I wrote above was correct.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-01 01:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <v3du4s$2febh$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385312 |
On Thu, 30 May 2024 14:34:00 +0100, bart wrote: > On 30/05/2024 03:32, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> On Wed, 29 May 2024 13:58:20 +0200, Bonita Montero wrote: >> >>> I've got a small commandline-tool that makes a const'd char -array >>> from any binary file. >> >> It seems to me it would be more efficient to use objcopy to turn that >> binary file directly into an object file with symbols accessible from C >> code defining its beginning and ending points. Then just link it into >> the executable. > > None of my compilers, whether for C or anything else, generate object > files. That’s too bad. All the good compilers, for languages like C and others which are meant to execute efficiently, do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-01 11:37 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <v3etlq$2o0sh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385378 |
On 01/06/2024 02:39, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2024 14:34:00 +0100, bart wrote:
>
>> On 30/05/2024 03:32, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 29 May 2024 13:58:20 +0200, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've got a small commandline-tool that makes a const'd char -array
>>>> from any binary file.
>>>
>>> It seems to me it would be more efficient to use objcopy to turn that
>>> binary file directly into an object file with symbols accessible from C
>>> code defining its beginning and ending points. Then just link it into
>>> the executable.
>>
>> None of my compilers, whether for C or anything else, generate object
>> files.
>
> That’s too bad. All the good compilers, for languages like C and others
> which are meant to execute efficiently, do.
What do you mean by 'are meant to execute efficiently'? Is that
build-time or run-time of the resulting program?
In the latter case, whether it uses object files is irrevant.
For build-time, pointlessly generating a discrete object file will slow
things down.
My compilers don't routinely generate object files, which would also
need an external dependency (a linker), but they can do if necessary
(eg. to statically link my code into another program with another compiler).
The compiler for my main language is a whole-program one. If it were to
create an object file, it would be a single file; there would be no
others to link to!
And here, makefiles also assume independent compilation of modules.
So it is makefiles that appear to be holding back advancement in this
area, by requiring traditional module-at-a-time building, and requiring
object file intermediates.
C:\qx52>mm -obj qq
Compiling qq.m to qq.obj
C:\qx52>dir qq.obj
01/06/2024 11:34 787,788 qq.obj
C:\qx52>gcc qq.obj -oqq # 'link'
C:\qx52>qq
Q5.2 Interpreter
Usage:
qq filename[.q]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-02 03:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <v3goqo$36n61$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385382 |
On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 11:37:45 +0100, bart wrote: > My compilers don't routinely generate object files, which would also > need an external dependency (a linker), but they can do if necessary > (eg. to statically link my code into another program with another > compiler). Modular code design would indicate that there is no point the compiler duplicating functionality available in the linker.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-02 10:37 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <v3hehi$39s59$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385401 |
On 02/06/2024 04:27, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 11:37:45 +0100, bart wrote: > >> My compilers don't routinely generate object files, which would also >> need an external dependency (a linker), but they can do if necessary >> (eg. to statically link my code into another program with another >> compiler). > > Modular code design would indicate that there is no point the compiler > duplicating functionality available in the linker. Python uses modules and yet doesn't have a linker. How on earth does it manage? Lots of languages get by without linkers. Or without having to pointlessly write out lots of discrete files, with a lot of useful info lost, then having to read them all in again. (Look at the mess that 'objcopy' gets into.) Quite a few compilers give the impression that they also do the job of linking: gcc x.c y.c z.c produces an executable. Does it really matter here whether the 'linking' is done by a separate program on discrete files, or completely internally? Having all modules in-memory gives you the opportunity for whole-program optimisation, will all useful info intact, without having to invent the far hairier and unwieldy concept of LTO. Here is also my assembler in action given modules x.asm y.asm z.asm produced by my C compiler: aa x y z It does the job of 'linking' but working from .asm files straight to .exe or .dll. What's the effing point of a separate linker here? Personally I first designed out a traditional linker sometime around 1983. The special Loader I write to combined my object files into a single binary took seconds, even on floppies. A traditional linker would have taken minutes. God knows what they were doing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-03 01:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <v3j5hm$3j4v3$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385409 |
On Sun, 2 Jun 2024 10:37:55 +0100, bart wrote: > On 02/06/2024 04:27, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 11:37:45 +0100, bart wrote: >> >>> My compilers don't routinely generate object files, which would also >>> need an external dependency (a linker), but they can do if necessary >>> (eg. to statically link my code into another program with another >>> compiler). >> >> Modular code design would indicate that there is no point the compiler >> duplicating functionality available in the linker. > > Python uses modules and yet doesn't have a linker. What is importlib, then, if not something that links everything together? And guess what: it’s a module.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-03 11:16 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <20240603111615.00003e96@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #385428 |
On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 01:16:39 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > On Sun, 2 Jun 2024 10:37:55 +0100, bart wrote: > > > On 02/06/2024 04:27, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 11:37:45 +0100, bart wrote: > >> > >>> My compilers don't routinely generate object files, which would > >>> also need an external dependency (a linker), but they can do if > >>> necessary (eg. to statically link my code into another program > >>> with another compiler). > >> > >> Modular code design would indicate that there is no point the > >> compiler duplicating functionality available in the linker. > > > > Python uses modules and yet doesn't have a linker. > > What is importlib, then, if not something that links everything > together? > > And guess what: it’s a module. Bart is very obviously correct. When all sources are available, linker is merely an implementation detail. Much less necessary implementation detail too in the world of big RAM and of not particularly big apps. LTCG is sort of admission of this fact. Even in old days of small RAMs, super-popular TurboPascal suit had modules, but I don't think that it had linker.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-04 02:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <v3lt3f$48om$14@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385443 |
On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:16:15 +0300, Michael S wrote: > When all sources are available, linker is merely an implementation > detail. That’s assuming all the code is written in the same language, compilable with the same compiler. For typical non-trivial open-source projects, this is usually not true. And consider, even with C, the meaning of top-level “static” and the implications for compiling the source in separate pieces versus all at once. > Even in old days of small RAMs, super-popular TurboPascal suit had > modules, but I don't think that it had linker. The programs it built had sizes in, say, the tens of thousands of lines at most.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-04 12:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <v3mtp9$ct28$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385503 |
On 04/06/2024 03:10, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:16:15 +0300, Michael S wrote: > >> When all sources are available, linker is merely an implementation >> detail. > > That’s assuming all the code is written in the same language, compilable > with the same compiler. Why, how many C compilers do you use for the same project? Yes it would want build projects where you only have a binary object file of some library, then you need a tool that can process that. But I nearly always use DLLs. > > For typical non-trivial open-source projects, this is usually not true. > > And consider, even with C, the meaning of top-level “static” and the > implications for compiling the source in separate pieces versus all at > once. > >> Even in old days of small RAMs, super-popular TurboPascal suit had >> modules, but I don't think that it had linker. > > The programs it built had sizes in, say, the tens of thousands of lines at > most. I can build programs of 100s of thousands of lines with no linker. Why wouldn't it be scalable? You would anyway expect larger programs to ne split into different binaries such as dynamic libraries.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-05 01:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <v3ogbd$pgpu$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385532 |
On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 12:28:41 +0100, bart wrote: > On 04/06/2024 03:10, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:16:15 +0300, Michael S wrote: >> >>> When all sources are available, linker is merely an implementation >>> detail. >> >> That’s assuming all the code is written in the same language, >> compilable with the same compiler. > > Why, how many C compilers do you use for the same project? It’s not just C. And consider, even with C, the meaning of top-level “static” and the implications for compiling the source in separate pieces versus all at once.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-04 19:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <86ikyom7jp.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #385532 |
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > On 04/06/2024 03:10, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:16:15 +0300, Michael S wrote: >> >>> When all sources are available, linker is merely an >>> implementation detail. >> >> That's assuming all the code is written in the same language, >> compilable with the same compiler. > > Why, how many C compilers do you use for the same project? Depends on the project.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-03 11:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <v3k50b$3rdhi$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385428 |
On 03/06/2024 02:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Jun 2024 10:37:55 +0100, bart wrote:
>
>> On 02/06/2024 04:27, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 11:37:45 +0100, bart wrote:
>>>
>>>> My compilers don't routinely generate object files, which would also
>>>> need an external dependency (a linker), but they can do if necessary
>>>> (eg. to statically link my code into another program with another
>>>> compiler).
>>>
>>> Modular code design would indicate that there is no point the compiler
>>> duplicating functionality available in the linker.
>>
>> Python uses modules and yet doesn't have a linker.
>
> What is importlib, then, if not something that links everything together?
It seems to provide an API to the mechanisms behind 'import'.
> And guess what: it’s a module.
So, you use it like this:
import importlib
maybe? So how does importlib manage to import importlib before importlib
itself is imported?
There is NO ahead-of-time linking of modules in Python as it is
understood in traditional compiled languages.
Besides, all such statements are executed at runtime, and can be
conditional.
There are of course mechanisms to collate symbols across different
modules, which are executed at runtime and on demand. There are
similarities to the methods used to maintain the global symbol table in
my whole-program compilers, or in my assembler.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-04 02:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <v3lt74$48om$15@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #385451 |
On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:13:32 +0100, bart wrote: > So how does importlib manage to import importlib before importlib > itself is imported? I guess the same way a linker manages to link itself. > There is NO ahead-of-time linking of modules in Python as it is > understood in traditional compiled languages. Python is a compiled language. > Besides, all such statements are executed at runtime, and can be > conditional. It’s not the only object-code language with that property.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 12 of 28 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 … 28 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web