[Coco] pacos9 ported to lwtools

[Robert Gault]

Bill Pierce wrote:
>
> Tormod, after checking all the OS9 "defs" files, I see what you're saying. I also found the edition is not an "official" part of the header. I even searched the os9 assembler manuals and found nothing about the "edition" byte.
> BUT... Since it is used and displayed in several "standard" MW os9 utils such as "ident", I would think it was included by MW, maybe after all the manuals were written or maybe it was their "version control" and it just never got removed from the production editions. All I know is almost every assembler source I've ever looked at has this byte and there's provisions in the MW C compiler for including it as well. So I assume there was a reason even if just for developement, for the edition byte.
> Doing a couple of quick disassembles, I found "ident" will use the next byte after the "name" fcs string as the "edition" byte no matter what that byte actually is.
> I did find a few programs that did not have this byte, and even tried assembling a couple of my own sources without it (successfully). So as far as adding it to the lwtools assembler, I would think not. It would probably cause problems.
> Ya gotta love the Coco, we learn new things every day... even after 30 years :-)
>
>
> Bill Pierce
> "Today is a good day... I woke up" - Ritchie Havens
>

For what it is worth, Edition is mentioned in "The Complete Rainbow Guide to 
OS-9" by Dale L. Puckett and Peter Dibble, RS 26-3190, p. 293.

"
MOD ModLen, ProgName...
ProgName fcs /Example/
Edition fcb 1

The Edition byte following the name isn't necessary, but it's a convention. If 
you don't put a one-byte field here, indicating the version of the program (or 
whatever else you like), commands like IDENT that print the edition number will 
use whatever falls in that spot as the edition. Nothing important relies on this 
value, but it is easy to include and it makes your progrms consistent with most 
other OS-9 programs."

Robert