Brian Ford wrote:
gcc doesn't create .o or .exe files. as/ld do respectively :).
Of course. There *are* gcc ports that don't use binutils, I know - I've
done gcc ports. But most regular folks think of gcc as a monolithic
compiler suite.
Anyway, I'll probably report this on the binutils list
Alex Vinokur wrote:
How can one get the creation time of object file foo.o?
Use objdump -p.
But it looks like gcc doesn't stuff a timestamp into the .o, but does
into the .exe.
Visual C++ puts a timestamp in both the .obj and .exe.
--
Unsubscribe info:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Shankar Unni wrote:
Alex Vinokur wrote:
How can one get the creation time of object file foo.o?
Use objdump -p.
But it looks like gcc doesn't stuff a timestamp into the .o, but does
into the .exe.
Just a simple correction. gcc doesn't create .o or .exe files.
$ uname -sr
CYGWIN_NT-5.0 1.5.5(0.94/3/2)
$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 3.3.1 (cygming special)
[snip]
$ cmp -v
cmp (GNU diffutils) 2.8.4
[snip]
--- C program (foo.c) ---
int main()
{
return 0;
}
-
$ gcc foo.c -o x1.exe
$ gcc foo.c -o x2.exe
$ cmp x1.exe x2.exe
x1.exe
Alex Vinokur wrote:
[...]
$ gcc foo.c -o x1.exe
$ gcc foo.c -o x2.exe
$ cmp x1.exe x2.exe
x1.exe x2.exe differ: char 137, line 2
Why are x1.exe and x2.exe different?
Because the PE header has a field that contains
the creation time. Due to this feature the MD5-sums
of executables compiled on
Demmer, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alex Vinokur wrote:
[...]
$ gcc foo.c -o x1.exe
$ gcc foo.c -o x2.exe
$ cmp x1.exe x2.exe
x1.exe x2.exe differ: char 137, line 2
Why are x1.exe and x2.exe different?
Because the PE header has a field that contains
the
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, Alex Vinokur wrote:
Demmer, Thomas TDemmer at krafteurope dot com wrote in message
Please, no plain text email addresses in replies. They are food
for spammers. Thanks.
Alex Vinokur wrote:
[...]
$ gcc foo.c -o x1.exe
$ gcc foo.c -o x2.exe
$ cmp x1.exe x2.exe
Demmer, Thomas wrote:
Because the PE header has a field that contains
the creation time. Due to this feature the MD5-sums
of executables compiled on two different machines will hardly ever
concide. I have no clue why this feature exists.
Almost *all* object file formats (ELF, COFF/PE, ...) have
Shankar Unni wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Demmer, Thomas wrote:
Because the PE header has a field that contains
the creation time. Due to this feature the MD5-sums
of executables compiled on two different machines will hardly ever
concide. I have no clue why this feature
Demmer, Thomas wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[snip]
Due to this feature the MD5-sums
of executables compiled on two different machines will hardly ever
concide.
[snip]
How to compute the MD5-sums of executables?
--
Alex Vinokur
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alex Vinokur wrote:
How to compute the MD5-sums of executables?
man md5sum
Brian
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:
11 matches
Mail list logo
