Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 14:38:41 +0200
From: Laszlo Molnar <laszlo DOT molnar AT eth DOT ericsson DOT se>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Cc: "Markus F . X . J . Oberhumer" <markus AT oberhumer DOT com>
Subject: Re: CLIO 2.04 exe to use UPX in the next update
Message-ID: <20021015143841.L19082@libra.eth.ericsson.se>
References: <10210141330 DOT AA25068 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <005c01c2743f$2c714e60$0a02a8c0 AT p4>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i
In-Reply-To: <005c01c2743f$2c714e60$0a02a8c0@p4>; from acottrel@ihug.com.au on Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 09:36:28PM +1000
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> I did this and it looks like the bytes betwen 800 hex and 1210 hex go

Looks like UPX had lost almost all of the COFF headers... Unfortunately
the current version of UPX has lots of workarounds for the COFF headers
oddities in the previous binutils versions, and I guess the latest
binutils will also need some work.

Without too deep inspection it seems like that the main problem with
this file is that it puts the start of the image at virtual & physical
address 0x1210. Which gets "corrected" by UPX for some reasons. If that
address would be 0x1200 (or 0x1000 or 0xA00 -- anyway why is there so
much zeroes in that file??) it might work. Are there any chance of
fixing this by changing some linker scripts?

Laszlo