X-Authentication-Warning:	ieva01.lanet.lv: pavenis owned process doing -bs
Date:	Fri, 19 Mar 1999 10:03:33 +0200 (WET)
From:	Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
To:	Frank Heckenbach <frank AT tim DOT gerwinski DOT de>
cc:	peter AT gerwinski DOT de, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: DJGPP preprocessor and link command specs
In-Reply-To:	<4D30E3B7.19990319003512.FOO-6CC6.frank@goedel.fjf.gnu.de>
Message-ID:	<Pine.A41.4.05.9903190956150.64622-100000@ieva01.lanet.lv>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Fri, 19 Mar 1999, Frank Heckenbach wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> last week I posted about why I think that the DJGPP compiler should
> dump the LINK_COMMAND_SPECS, but didn't get any response yet. But
> for me the current situation is not very satisfying because of the
> problems I explained.
> 
> So, are there any objections if we make the compiler dump
> LINK_COMMAND_SPECS, and if so, what kind of objections?
> 
> Frank
> 

Tested, since March 17 dumping link_command_specs is egcs CVS repository
(Mark Elbreht sent the patch). So perhaps it will be in egcs-1.2 (also in
next snapshot)

Andris

===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/egcs/egcs/gcc/gcc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.93
retrieving revision 1.94
diff -u -r1.93 -r1.94
--- egcs/gcc/gcc.c	1999/03/10 20:32:13	1.93
+++ egcs/gcc/gcc.c	1999/03/17 21:51:18	1.94
@@ -2736,6 +2736,8 @@
 	  init_spec ();
 	  for (sl = specs; sl; sl = sl->next)
 	    printf ("*%s:\n%s\n\n", sl->name, *(sl->ptr_spec));
+          if (link_command_spec)
+            printf ("*link_command:\n%s\n\n", link_command_spec);
 	  exit (0);
 	}
       else if (! strcmp (argv[i], "-dumpversion"))

- Raw text -