Hello folks,

I am trying to convert my managed makefile project into a standard makefile 
product (using PODS) and, as usual, have lots of trouble.

After a whole day of hacking and kludging around, I finally got a Debug version 
of my application to compile. (I'll try to figure out how to create a release 
version later.) Problem is, the result of the compilation is quite different 
from the original!

Examining the various options with which the various tools are being called in 
both cases, I don't see any significant differences. OK, the options are 
supplied in different order, the directory paths are different, the managed 
makefile project invokes the compiler with an option that tells it to search 
the $(TOOLS_DIR)/include/stlport directory for include files (which is really 
not necessary for non-C++ programs) and the PalmRC tool is called with some 
locale-related options in the standard makefile project - but that's about it; 
I don't see how any of these things would result in a vastly different file.

Examining the structure of the generated files in both cases, I see that the 
difference comes from the fact that the managed makefile project has generated 
a 'data' resource that is about 9 Kb large, while the standard makefile project 
has generated a 'data' resource that is only 822 bytes large. This is where the 
main difference comes from. (There is also a small difference of 200 bytes in 
the size of one of the code segments. I don't understand the reason for that 
difference either, given that the same optimization options are used in both 
cases.)

OK, so what is the meaning of the 'data' resource and what compiler options 
affect it? I had the impression that is was where the global variables were 
stored - but my application doesn't use any global variables... A C++ 
application probably also stores stuff there - but mine is a plain C 
application...

Help?

Regards,
Vesselin
-- 
For information on using the PalmSource Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, 
please see http://www.palmos.com/dev/support/forums/

Reply via email to