Date:	Thu, 21 Jun 2001 19:32:45 +0300 (WET)
From:	Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
To:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
Cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: gcc 3.0 released
In-Reply-To:	<200106211639.MAA13574@envy.delorie.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.A41.4.05.10106211927210.132868-100000@ieva06.lanet.lv>
MIME-Version:	1.0
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 Thu, 21 Jun 2001, DJ Delorie wrote:

> 
> Could you be more specific?
> 
> [djgpp-workers cc'd]
> 
> > Tried to make clean installation under DOSEMU-1.0.2:
> > 	djdev203.zip, bnu211b.zip, ...

Well also gcc30b.zip and gpp30b.zip

> > 
> > Seems we have some showstopper:
> > 	djgpp.djl from djdev203.zip is incompatible with gcc-3.0 (one from
> > 	current CVS is OK). There is no other known problems with 
> > 	djdev203

djgpp.djl from djdev203.zip doesn't contains all section names which are
used. As result linker does bad things when linking. It was taken into
account in CVS version some months ago

> > 
> > I can workaround that by small modifications:
> > 	changing specs to use djgpp-x.djl (or some similar name) instead
> > 		of djgpp.djl 
> > 	put CVS version of djgpp-x.djl in the same directory where specs,
> > 		cc1.exe, etc
> > 

I can say simplier: I can workaround that by providing replacement
for djgpp.dlj. Different name is choosed to avoid possibility to use 
incompatible one. 

> > After that gcc-3.0 to works in non LFN environment (under
> > DOSEMU-1.0.2)
> > 
> > So unless there are objections against this I'll upload such version
> > 

Andris

- Raw text -