BASE et.al. and DLL relinking on W32

[Ben Hyde <bh...@pobox.com>]

thanks Jon.  I recall two additional things though.  A tool
that if applied at install time will assure no conflicts
on load, and a scheme that marks each DLL's with it's required
DLLs in a manner that allows the dynamic loader to know that
it doesn't have to worry AT ALL, and can just mmap the pages
and be done with it.  I stumbled on this by dumping the DLL's
using some dump tool and noticing that the OS DLL's have thier
required DLL's marked up with date stamps, but my DLLs didn't.

 - ben hyde

Jon Teichrow writes:
 > I think BASE is what you're lookng for (from MSDEV help):
 > 
 > The Base Address (/BASE:{address | @filename,key}) option sets a base
 > address for the program, overriding the default location for an .EXE file
 > (at 0x400000) or a DLL (at 0x10000000). The operating system first attempts
 > to load a program at its specified or default base address. If sufficient
 > space is not available there, the system relocates the program. To prevent
 > relocation, use the /FIXED option.
 > 
 > If you are using BASE for an EXE that will run on both Win9X and
 > NT, you should set it to 0x400000 or higher, otherwise the Win9X
 > loader must relocate to a different address which increases the
 > loading time on Win9X.
 > 
 > 
 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: Ben Hyde <bh...@pobox.com>
 > To: new-httpd@apache.org <ne...@apache.org>
 > Date: Saturday, July 11, 1998 9:13 AM
 > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Link DSO modules against possible libraries from
 > $(LIBS) (take 2)
 > 
 > 
 > >
 > >This reminds me.  There are linker switchs on the NT
 > >that allow you to state where in the address space
 > >the dll is initially linked and if set up approprately
 > >it makes startup faster.  At some point we ought
 > >to use these.  If somebody want's tow tackle this
 > >I'd be happy to go dig up in my notes what the tools
 > >and switchs are, the story is longer than one would
 > >expect.   - ben hyde
 >