Re: COFF/PE gas regression: bug

[Donn Terry <donn@interix.com>]

Given the enthusiastic(?) response over the last most-of-a-week,
I think it's reasonable to conclude that there isn't much interest
left in "ordinary" COFF.  (I won't go so far as "none", because
I'm sure there are interested folks who aren't on this list.)

I'm not sure whether that makes things harder or easier;
the lack of a comparison base will definitely make things harder.
(I have someone within Softway who thinks they may be able to
come up with something, but until it happens, it hasn't happened :-) ).

Donn

Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> 
>    Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 10:17:55 -0700
>    From: Donn Terry <donn@interix.com>
> 
>    I believe the gas testsuite has a bad test, as follows:  In
>    testsuite/gas/all/gas.exp, one of the tests is for structure tags
>    (see cofftag*).  It creates the symbol _operator as
>    storage class 16 (MOE), type 11 (0xb, MOE).  According to
>    the best COFF standard I have (which is no longer on
>    the web that I can find, but was on SCO's website):
>    "A special section number (-2) marks symbolic debugging symbols,
>    including structure/union/enumeration tag names...".
>    (Microsoft's PE documentation agrees, but isn't quite as
>    explicit.)  (DJ's machine is not responding at the moment.)
> 
>    The test expects a value of -1 (Absolute symbol), which according
>    to the above is incorrect.
> 
> The best approach for something like this is to see what the tools on
> some other COFF system do.  Can anybody try assembling
> gas/testsuite/gas/all/cofftag.s on a native COFF system?
> 
> Ian

-- 

===================================================
Donn Terry                  mailto:donn@interix.com
Softway Systems, Inc.        http://www.interix.com
2850 McClelland Dr, Ste. 1800   Ft.Collins CO 80525
Tel: +1-970-204-9900           Fax: +1-970-204-9951
===================================================