delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Wed, 4 Jul 2001 02:37:50 -0400 |
Message-Id: | <200107040637.CAA22203@envy.delorie.com> |
X-Authentication-Warning: | envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT envy DOT delorie DOT com using -f |
From: | DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> |
To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
In-reply-to: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010704093541.3231D-100000@is> (message from Eli |
Zaretskii on Wed, 4 Jul 2001 09:36:44 +0300 (IDT)) | |
Subject: | Re: Upload of gcc-3.0 archives |
References: | <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010704093541 DOT 3231D-100000 AT is> |
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 |
> What wasn't clear to me was whether GCC invokes the linker with -T under > some circumstances. It does if it uses our specs, which add the -T option. Well, *added* because gcc 3.0 does it differently. We shouldn't be using custom specs, which means we shouldn't be adding -T. GCC doesn't add -T by default unless we tell it to. > > assuming they use the above method, this will have no effect on them. > > I'm not sure this assumption holds. Anything which managed to get the right link specs before, should still get them. We're only changing defaults, and if you've already overridden the defaults, changing the defaults shouldn't matter.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |