[Coco] CoCo gcc project

[KnudsenMJ at aol.com]

In a message dated 11/3/03 7:20:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
dbree at duo-county.com writes:

> Personally, I'd line to see
>  all OS9 code remain PIC.  RSDOS could go non-PIC, or for convenience, we
>  might let it be PIC.

Sounds like we really need a PIC/absolute option for RSDOS, and so why not 
have it for OS9 also (for faster, smaller  L2 code)?

>  I think a common assembler and linker could be
>  used.  The biggest difference would come in the linker stage.  The
>  linker would simply build a different module depending on whether it was
>  OS9 or RSDOS.

Is there any RSDOS convention for object modules?  That is, have there been 
any assemblers for RSDOS that didn't assemble everything as one big source file?
If not, then there is no RSDOS convention, and we should carry OS9's RMA 
convention over to RSDOS.

I agree that the linker is really where the difference is output for RSDOS 
versus OS9.
  
>  Finally, what assembler/linker?  Do we use AS or try to do a totally
>  rma/rlink compatible routine.  We do already have RMA rebuilt as a cross
>  assembler (OS9 only for now), and we still have rlink to go.  If most
>  people prefer to go to AS, we have all the source to rebuild it to
>  whatever we want.

I never heard of AS until now.  Since we have RMA already, and no reason not 
to port it into RSDOS as well, why not stick with what we all know?  --Mike K.