Date:	Sun, 9 Jan 2000 10:18:05 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Mumit Khan <khan AT nanotech DOT wisc DOT edu>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: (patch) updated protoize patch
In-Reply-To:	<200001070051.SAA12564@mercury.xraylith.wisc.edu>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000109101728.23866n-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Mumit Khan wrote:

> Please ignore the last patch I had sent and use this one instead. Just
> as a reminder, this is against gcc-2.95.2 tree. For those using gcc
> mainline, it's already in the sources. You can look at the mainline 
> patch (already committed) at:

Thanks.  The changes seem okay, but the following hunk bothers me:

@@ -2032,7 +2128,11 @@ munge_compile_params (params_list)
 
   temp_params[param_count++] = "-S";
   temp_params[param_count++] = "-o";
+#if defined (__MSDOS__) || (defined (_WIN32) && ! defined (__CYGWIN__) && ! defined (_UWIN))
+  temp_params[param_count++] = "NUL:";
+#else
   temp_params[param_count++] = "/dev/null";
+#endif
 
   /* Leave room for the input file name argument.  */
   input_file_name_index = param_count;

I'm afraid that "NUL:" (with the colon) won't work for DJGPP, since
the device name is just "NUL".  I don't have GCC sources installed, so
can someone please test this?

If it doesn't work, then we have two alternatives:

  - use "NUL" instead, I think it should work for Mingw and Cygwin as
    well;

  - if "NUL" doesn't work for Mingw and Cygwin, leave "NUL:" for them
    only, and use "/dev/null" for DJGPP (by removing __MSDOS__ from
    the #ifdef).

- Raw text -