From:	kifox AT hotmail DOT com (kifox)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Flexible Linking for GCC?
Date:	26 Jan 1998 03:39:53 GMT
Organization:	Your Organization
Lines:	18
Message-ID:	<6ah0i9$cgf$3@winter.news.erols.com>
References:	<34CAEB55 DOT 6CEC1041 AT thegrid DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	user19.firstsaga.com
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

In article <34CAEB55 DOT 6CEC1041 AT thegrid DOT net>, elange AT thegrid DOT net says...
>
>I need to do some 32-bit programming under DOS, but not with DPMI
>compliance.  So far, I have been doing all of my development using MASM
>6.11, because only an assembler gives me the flexibility I need.
>However, my development time is too long, and I need to develop an SDK
>for other users (my application is an OS-extender).
>
>I want to be able to develop in C/C++ for obvious reasons.  But, all I
>need the compiler to do is generate 32-bit code under some set of
>assumptions.  I also want the linker to allow me to replace all of the
>startup code, so I can load it any way I choose.  Basically, I just need
>to know the compiler assumptions.

Why would you want to do this? Only real reason I can think of for replacing 
the DJGPP startup code is so one could load some kind of virus-infested 
startup code in it's place.....

- Raw text -