From:	pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
To:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:08:59 +0200
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: GCC: DJGPP bootstrap fix + define MSDOS
Message-ID:	<3A83DDDB.27937.17876C@localhost>
In-reply-to:	<5137-Fri09Feb2001114100+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
References:	<Pine DOT A41 DOT 4 DOT 05 DOT 10102090913070 DOT 95006-100000 AT ieva06 DOT lanet DOT lv> (message from Andris Pavenis on Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:27:12 +0200 (WET))
X-mailer:	Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On 9 Feb 2001, at 11:41, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> > when compiling STLPort 4.0 for DJGPP (stlp40s.zip) this flag is explicitly
> > used. So build will be broken if we totally remove it. Maybe there are
> > other similar packages.
> 
> Would making -mbnu210 be used by GCC by default solve both problems?
> If so, I think we should use that.
> 
> If we choose this solution, could users use -no-mbnu210 to reverse the
> default?

It's so with my DJGPP binaries of gcc-2.95.3-test3 I'm using (-mbnu210 
is default unless -mno-bnu210 is specified). I don't see any special  
reason to change this for gcc-2.95.3 release when it will appear

The situation is different with gcc-3.0: as far as I understood gcc-2.97
currently cannot be bootstrapped for DJGPP if  -mbnu210 is not 
removed.

Maybe it's possible to still provide these options simply for 
compatibility for some time without actually using them (maybe 
warning that this option is obsolete and is ignored would be OK.
However I don't know whether it can easily be done)

Andris

- Raw text -