Xref: utzoo comp.sys.att:3328 unix-pc.general:731
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!amdcad!ames!ncar!oddjob!gargoyle!ddsw1!tarkus!jcs
From: jcs@tarkus.UUCP (John C. Sucilla)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att,unix-pc.general
Subject: Re: What's the difference
Message-ID: <95@tarkus.UUCP>
Date: 25 May 88 03:22:36 GMT
References: <2347@ukecc.engr.uky.edu>
Reply-To: jcs@tarkus.UUCP (John C. Sucilla)
Organization: tarkus -- Calumet City, IL.
Lines: 24

In article <2347@ukecc.engr.uky.edu> edward@engr.uky.edu (Edward C. Bennett) writes:

>fixRTC:		mc68k executable (shared demand paged with shared library) -F (0413 demand paged) 
>
>Then I compiled it with Emmet Gray's ccc script. file(1) gave:
>
>a.out:		mc68k executable (shared demand paged with shared library) 
>
>What's the -F stuff in the first example? The files are the same size both
>unstripped and stripped.

It means the first example had the -F switch turned on during the ld phase.
Whats makes this better than the -z option (besides alleged faster paging)
I don't understand.  Check out LD(1) in your users manual volume II. It says
-F is the default but I don't believe it, I've never seen anything I
compiled display that when file'd.  Apparently, it works for you though,
hmmmm...

Could somebody explain why using .text and .data offsets the same as in
the file .vs. using segment boundries is faster?
-- 
John "C". Sucilla
  {ihnp4,chinet,ddsw1}!tarkus!jcs
    You have a better idea? Now's the time..