X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f X-Recipient: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: DJGPP port of GNU binutils 2.34 uploaded. To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com References: <202003101900 DOT 02AJ0s2L026948 AT delorie DOT com> <88b53f3e-5c10-256f-5a0c-aa942a48c6e9 AT gmail DOT com> <5E694788 DOT 5090308 AT gmx DOT de> From: "Andris Pavenis (andris DOT pavenis AT iki DOT fi) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" Message-ID: <41a90860-92e9-632e-4b56-4da87681e8f3@iki.fi> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:30:16 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5E694788.5090308@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US-large Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from Quoted-Printable to 8bit by delorie.com id 02D4V3rU007218 Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On 3/11/20 10:18 PM, Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com] wrote: > Am 11.03.2020 15:56, schrieb J.W. Jagersma (jwjagersma AT gmail DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]: > > [snip] >>>    DJGPP specific changes. >>>    ======================= >>>    - There are no DJGPP specific changes compared with the previous port. >>>      The DJGPP specific changes enumerated below are the same than the ones >>>      already available in the previous port. >> >> Are there any plans to have these changes (even partially) upstreamed >> to GNU?  Because currently the upstream version is unusable even for >> cross-compiling, primarily due to a missing '_environ' symbol in the >> ldscripts. > > No, I have no intention to upstream the patch to GNU.  Primary due to my > limited english skills I do not want to become involved in endless discussions > about a port that may be considered today as archaic by the maintainers. > I do not even know if there is still an official COFF and/or djgpp maintainer > of binutils. Getting in parts that are necessary for building a cross-compiler should be not too difficult I guess . Than means changes to libbfd and linker scripts. I suppose that DJ would give some support in discussions. An example of such assistance: - https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2016-07/msg02005.html (see all thread) I did not succeed to get in all changes in than but would not have perhaps got in anything at all without DJ assistance then Changes needed to build with 8+3 filename limitations is another thing. I would not even try that. I does not really matter as it is easy to build native binutils for DJGPP using cross-compiler. > Neitherless everybody is invited to review the patch and to try to get part > of it upstreamed into binutils.  I will not interfer nor make any claims on > it.  If you think you can convince the binutils maintainers to accept parts > of the patch that make the cross-compiler work again or if you have a better > solution for the djgpp specific issues, please feel free to go ahaed. > If there are any other parts of the patch that you think are usefull to get > included into binutils again, go ahead. You need to submit copyright papers to FSF also if somebody else is handling getting changes to upstream if I understand correctly (of course of You do not have that already done). Andris PS. English is not my native language either. I did not learn English at school at all (then in Latvia about half learned German and half English at school and I belonged to part learning German. It (German) is well forgotten now however. Currently I mostly use Finnish in everyday life including at work. So I do not think that Your english skills are a problem here also when I see what You have written in this list