OSDev.org

Since when does it take OMF/OBJ input????

is that an error in the faq or is it true????????

and what about Win32/COFF??

does the watcom compiller output win32/COFF with .obj extension or does it give out 32 bit OMF/OBJ????

thanks for the help.. if this is true, Im saved.. dont need to modify no linker or learn how to use JLOC(this seems to be harder then writting a linker)

thanks

later

you can compile LD to output just about anything. hence it can output WIN32/COFF, etc.

watcom outputs object files, which are linked to create an WIN32/COFF executable. (from memory anyway.. its been a while since I used it).

Im talking about what it takes in... my output would be flat binary


but on the faq it sais it can take omf/obj

and u mean the win32/coff to be the warped coff version: PE

so watcom outputs omf/obj...

cuz I checked the diff between watcom obj and BCC(borland builder) obj and were very different(I checked in a hex editor)

but I guess it doesnt take it... in that case, FIX THE FAQ

and maybe someone does know a simple kernel with a simple JLOC script.. I wanna do something but Im totally lost with no simple example

thanks, later

um.. win32/coff is 'PE'.

my watcom can output omf/obj.. it can also output ELF and lots of other formats...

i dont know what your problem is.

as for watcom obj and borland obj being different.. heh. you need to understand that obj is made up of records and all records look different. so the same code via two different compilers to same output format will look totally different.

I know the code(obj) will be different, its just that the text declared "blah blah" was at the begining for watcom and at the end in borland.. I mean all the constant declarations and so on...

but thats besides the point. What I need is a linker that will output flat binnary code and will take omf/obj
If you can give me an example of a simple kernel that can be done with watcom and jloc or borland and jloc...

Thanks

and I read that the ELF Watcom output is broken. Has it been fixed???

Would using ELF be a good ideea for executable files for an OS???

thanks once again

later

why in the world would you need .obj -> .bin?

That'll cause compatiblity probs ( i.e, code sections, win32 system stuff, won't it? )

obj works in dos too... no, nothing to do with windoze, unless its coff object format ... the PE is a warped/mutilated version of authentic coff...

either way, the reason I want OBJ->bin is that OBJ is the original object file format created by intel.. the most basic..

and cuz thats the ONLY thing I use AND WILL EVER USE

I mean the compillers I like otput that and thats what I want to use...

how can I make it more clear???

The thing is not y but how!

Why care what object format you use as long as both the compiler and linker support it? Why should OBJ (originally only 16-bit but tweaked by Borland -- not Intel -- for 32-bit) be any better than COFF or PE or ELF?

How the hell do u make BCC or Watcom CompillEr output anything else but OBJ??? and if u know better, show me how I can obtain flat binnary code from either one of these 2 compillers

and OBJ is used by visual C and Watcom C and everything and is not tweaked .. its just the 32 bit version of the 16 bit.. and its very basic, works with libraries(ELF was created to do the same for UNIX Machines if I remember wright)

anyway... I dont get the question

and I cant see an answer to my question.

thanks, later

Well, you have two options:

1) Find a compiler/linker combination which will support OBJ files
2) Use a different object file format

Repeatedly asking the same question is *not* an option.

so what you can do if you want a flat program (for a given load address XYZ) is to read out the .EXE file, read the relocation entries and fill the corresponding locations with the load address and then drop the headers ... that's what i do for my SOS.EXE program ...

look at exemapper.c in http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/clic ... z?download

oops .. sorry, this is rather mzexe.c :-[