X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
	:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=FbB2L3sv5Di0cfXq19RA8rhc3W/m1a8PHT7174D6muA=;
	b=yFVpKAcVGxHh2c+jKquc5qdOjTlKnNp6vTspVpYDckpypgpXLaN3Y9bK0Mzf8MXuNJ
	qvRlZ3tMeIAJYZcOHL6/8n+b85mMW3mgrqAZyMznBwh9eAzC2bUEzw4n8u1pqtwmezZH
	7rBBTCaL8+kPLFC4f2FnE/g1KaKxOvWYcvWIN5cbhVmN4Sh6oShSAlrg4fGvEZA8++QH
	Vq6/Oo8porsYS1MhRPIbPawwrIe8HfTvh/WZOpcLqxta7EGiQKb4PrWOHOyqM8wedanf
	nJbpoEogtOrcsjF46u45hAWO5RQrFRmNt6WgWPTUZZUZtQJF44/WOaQPH4ZqFYEv9zwl
	PXPQ==
X-Received:	by 10.43.17.135 with SMTP id qc7mr16838666icb.14.1434120174442;
	Fri, 12 Jun 2015 07:42:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:	<557AEFEB.9070902@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 12 Jun 2015 10:42:51 -0400
From:	"Frank Sapone (emoaddict15 AT gmail DOT com)" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: DJGGP 2.05 upgrade problems.
References:	<201506091712 DOT t59HCPci004068 AT delorie DOT com> <557739E0 DOT 6070608 AT gmail DOT com> <CAB9Rao93XrKFBpUDnZdjCz+rEXHGOU2RNKdou2oMLJOk802LnA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <55775E64 DOT 2090901 AT gmail DOT com> <CAB9Rao-Njdr-CB=vqHnb+TVDmXu3eXqsB5CHB7V0kDwBEsM-WQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <5579ED42 DOT 6070309 AT gmail DOT com> <bedfae3f-2695-4253-8d9c-11c55703f8b5 AT googlegroups DOT com> <83616ts7gt DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <510f0bc7-7911-4d22-bfca-48716371ecb5 AT googlegroups DOT com> <83r3phqbhd DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <557AE57B DOT 4090204 AT gmail DOT com> <83oaklqa2d DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
In-Reply-To:	<83oaklqa2d.fsf@gnu.org>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

>> I only grabbed the latest binutils and various friends from the
>> /beta/v2gnu section assuming these binaries were already made with 2.05
> So are you saying that the same binaries of find.exe and rm.exe
> suddenly stopped working for you?  That'd be strange.
>
> Or maybe those *.o files weren't there to begin with, due to
> compilation errors?
They were there, because i kept having to use del /s *.o to remove them.

- Raw text -