Date:	Mon, 14 Oct 1996 12:19:14 +0200 (METDST)
From:	Robert Hoehne <robert DOT hoehne AT mathematik DOT tu-chemnitz DOT de>
To:	DJGPP workers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: binutils 2.7 questions
Message-Id:	<Pine.HPP.3.91.961014120537.21796A-100000@newton.mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de>
Mime-Version:	1.0

On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, John M. Aldrich wrote:

> How about just saying '-o foo' to get 'foo', and '-o foo.exe' to get
> 'foo.exe'?  Why all the fuss?

I don't know exactly, what the reason for this idea was, but I think
this technique is a good one. With this it is possible to use most
of the UNIX makefiles without changing (in most parts), because they
use the -o switch without suffix but we (on MS-DOS) need executables
with .exe. In this way the problem is solved by updating a target
without a suffix and getting an executable in one step.

I'm realy not understand John what he has against this. Do you have
so small disk space that you cannot get both files at the same time?

> default stub.  What I want is to get just foo, so I can stubify it with
> my own stub or whatever.

Where is the problem if you have both files?

Robert

- Raw text -