Re: A85: Rigel, where'd it go??

To: assembly-85@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A85: Rigel, where'd it go??
From: mikep@anet-dfw.com (Michael Pearce)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:36:16 GMT
In-Reply-To: <34445C73.2563@algonet.se>
References: <3441967A.67BE@eden.rutgers.edu> <344266fd.54258123@mail.anet-dfw.com> <34427447.648A@eden.rutgers.edu> <34445C73.2563@algonet.se>
Reply-To: assembly-85@lists.ticalc.org

On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:02:28 -0700, you wrote:

>Ben Sferrazza wrote:
>> 
>> Sure.  Since Usgard uses some sort of fixup table for all relocation,
>> you must have at least two bytes for every fixup.  Ah, the beauty of
>> fixed address relocation.
>
>As Sam & Andi has mentioned, it's one byte most of the time. The format
>is very simple: if the next byte in the relocation table is >0, it's
>the relative address from the previous relocation address. If it's 0,
>the next word in the table is the relative address from the previous
>relocation address.
>
<snip>

I'll buy that.  thanks for the info.

-mike pearce

References:

A85: Rigel, where'd it go??

From: Ben Sferrazza <bens@eden.rutgers.edu>

Re: A85: Rigel, where'd it go??

From: mikep@anet-dfw.com (Michael Pearce)

Re: A85: Rigel, where'd it go??

From: Ben Sferrazza <bens@eden.rutgers.edu>

Re: A85: Rigel, where'd it go??

From: Jimmy Mårdell <mja@algonet.se>