gnupic: [gnupic] Different hex file generated by gpasm and mpasm
Subject:
RE: [gnupic] Different hex file generated by gpasm and mpasm
From:
Chen Xiao Fan ####@####.####
Date:
20 Sep 2005 11:56:46 +0100
Message-Id: <3B8AEFFADD3DD4118F8100508BACEC2C098B3762@spex>
Yes you are correct. I should have put gpasm/gplink
(versus mpasm/mplink) instead of gpasm.
I am not writing a hex file parser. I just find that there
are different interpretation of the hex file in different
host programs and I want to know more about the hex file
geneation process of gpasm.
To be more specific, I have some questions.
1) EEPROM handling of the PIC12/14 architecture.
MPLAB produces/exports of hex file of "00 xx". How about gputils?
2) Unimplemented bits in the configuration word:
Some of them are supposed to be read as 0 and some of
them are supposed to be read as 1. It seems to me that
MPASM/MPLINK will generate "1" no matter it should
read as 0 or 1.
3) Linker script
Any significant difference between the linker script used
in gputils and MPASM/MPLINK?
Regards,
Xiaofan
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Onion
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 5:02 PM
To: GNUPIC
Subject: RE: [gnupic] Different hex file generated by gpasm and mpasm
On Tue, 2005-09-20 at 08:11 +0800, Chen Xiao Fan wrote:
> For now yes I am looking at the hex file quite often since
> I am involved in the pickit-devel project. ;)-
I still fail to see why this is important unless you are reinventing the
wheel by writing your own hex file parser ?
> What I want to know is exactlly gpasm generates the hex
> file. The file in question is a single relocatable assembly
> file and I do not expect too much difference in the
> generated assmebly.
Ok, but gpasm does not produce a hex file in the case you give above.
gpasm produces the ".o" file which is read by gplink and that produces
the hex file.
Peter
