It could be I have a different version at home then I do at work.  I'll
check and see if I can find the note that stated the patch was there.  In
fact, I'll even double check my code to verify a callback can access global
variables without causing POSE to reset.

Gary Clark
Systems Programmer
JELD-WEN, inc.

> ----------
> From:         Michael S. Davis[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Reply To:     [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent:         Thursday, September 16, 1999 3:15 PM
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:      RE: Latest GCC version for Win32? (Was: IR question)
> 
> 
> I may be wrong but I don't think 2.7.2.2 has the CALLBACK problem fixed.
> I had to use CALLBACK_PROLOGUE and *_EPILOGUE.
> 
> On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Gary Clark wrote:
> 
> > The version I have here at work is 'gcc version 2.7.2.2-kgpd-071097'
> (the
> > one I have at home may be different, I'll check later).  Somewhere in
> the
> > notes it indicated that a patch was made to move the global register
> from A4
> > to A5.
> > 
> > 
> > Gary Clark
> > Systems Programmer
> > JELD-WEN, inc.
> > 
> > > ----------
> > > From:     Lonnie Foster[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Reply To:         [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent:     Thursday, September 16, 1999 11:16 AM
> > > To:       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject:  RE: Latest GCC version for Win32? (Was: IR question)
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Gary Clark wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Actually, if you use the latest GCC, you don't need the CALLBACK_*
> > > defines
> > > > anymore.  GCC now uses A5 instead of A4 to access globals.
> > > 
> > > Isn't the latest version (alpha 3, if I remember correctly) only
> available
> > > on
> > > Linux/Unix right now?  Any idea if anyone has plans to port it to
> Win32 in
> > > the 
> > > near future?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > /|\ Lonnie Foster  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  http://pobox.com/~tribble  
> > > \|/   There's something about clueless middle-aged white guys that
> makes
> > > /|\   them want to spread their misunderstanding to a larger audience.
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Shoot-to-Win
> 
> Protect the 2nd Amendment
> ----------------------------------------------------
> 
> 

Reply via email to