Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/06/15/05:09:14
On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Vik Heyndrickx wrote:
> Some are even not valid DOS names (go32/2.7.2.1/include).
You forget Windows 95, where such names *are* allowed.
> This may be a wise thing to do under a unix
> environment, but under dos this seems to me just a waste of clock
> cycles?
The waste of cycles only happens when you include a non-existing
header or gcc tries to call a non-eisting executable. Since DJGPP.ENV
sets things up so the *real* include directories are searched *before*
the default, a header will always be found in one of them, and you
don't get to the non-existent ones.
I also fail to see why do you think this behavior is more appropriate
on Unix than it is on DOS/Windows. If you don't have "/usr/local/bin"
on a Unix system, why is it reasonable to look for it?
- Raw text -