Re: Stdcall support in binutils

["Dmitry Timoshkov" <dmitry at baikal dot ru>]

"DJ Delorie" <dj@delorie.com> wrote:

> It looks correct to me, but we'd need a suitable ChangeLog entry (not
> a diff, just an entry) before we can apply it.

Is it enough?
* Log: Take into account --kill-at (-k) while generating .exp file.

> Also, the
> documentation for -k in binutils.texi is wrong.  Could you fix that
> too?

I'm afraid, not. For documentation my english is not fluent enough, sorry.

I have a general question regarding stdcall names handling:
Why so much special efforts are required to eliminate the names decoration
with binutils, while MS tools allow to not think about it at all?
(placing names in the export table of the PE executable, import library,
export file, linking with object files, linking with import library).
Currently I'm using dllwrap to build a dll, and dlltool to build an import
library. Could it be unified in future?

And yet another one:
Is there any way to place read only data to .rdata section instead of spreading
it over the whole .text? (That problem bothered me for years with djgpp).
--
Dmitry.