gnupic: Re: [gnupic] gpasm - __CONFIG
Subject:
Re: [gnupic] gpasm - __CONFIG
From:
Peter ####@####.####
Date:
31 Oct 2005 08:22:23 +0000
Message-Id: <q.pk.eidf@jkwc.zraa>
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005, Scott Dattalo wrote:
>
> Does anyone know if the order is supposed to matter for __CONFIG
> directives in 18F devices? In absolute mode, gpasm doesn't care about the
> order of the __CONFIG directives. However in relocatable mode it does.
I think that it depends on how the __CONFIG code (constant) handling
is implemented in the linker. I assume that there is a bug that causes
it to concatenate the words instead of combining them (or guesses the
storage type wrong from the combined data size).
You could look at the object file constants from the assembly output of
each source file and compare and see if they are identical to confirm
whether they gplink is the problem.
hope this helps,
Peter
