From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5483 invoked by alias); 26 Aug 2009 07:14:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 5462 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Aug 2009 07:14:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1-old.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 07:14:15 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com ([10.11.47.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n7Q7EC6k030322 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 03:14:13 -0400 Received: from [10.36.4.177] (vpn1-4-177.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.4.177]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n7Q7EB3p027194; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 03:14:11 -0400 Message-ID: <4A94E0C2.1050601@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 07:21:00 -0000 From: Nick Clifton User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gene Smith CC: binutils@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Suppress "Start Linear Address Record" in ihex file References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-08/txt/msg00472.txt.bz2 Hi Gene, > Our legacy loader for an embedded system chokes on record type 5 Given that the real bug is your legacy loader... > Here's the ways I have found to suppress the type 5 > hex record from the ihex file: > > 1. In objcopy, use "--set-start=" with it set to no value. (Possibly > setting to zero would also work.) > > 2. In link control file set "start=0;" (An address outside the defines > space.) > > 3. I have also used sed to remove the one-line record. > > Is this the correct way to suppress the "Start Linear Address" record > from the ihex file? There is no one correct way to suppress these records; it is a case of whatever works works. But if you want an opinion then I would recommend option 1) with an explicit start value of 0. (Assuming that that works). This is the clearest option. It might also be useful to add a comment to whatever makefile or build mechanism you are using where this command line option is added to objcopy explaining why it is needed. Cheers Nick