Date:	Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:55:46 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Comments on GCC 3.0 distribution
In-Reply-To:	<3B49D682.26047.1B0E2A@localhost>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1010709164740.8678D-100000@is>
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 Mon, 9 Jul 2001 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote:

> >   - Why are the C++ headers installed into lang/cxx-v3 instead of
> >     lang/cxx?  This seems to require gratuitous changes to djgpp.env.
> 
> Default instalation place of libstdc++ headers changes between
> gcc-2.95.X and gcc-3.0 for other system. This was reason why I 
> changed it for DJGPP also. Otherwise it would be impossible to 
> have for example gcc-2.95.3 and gcc-3.0 in the same directory tree
> (of course it requires renaming or moving some files)
> 
> About djgpp.env. gcc-2.7.2.1 was the latest version which required 
> $DJDIR/lang/cxx to be explicitly specified in djgpp.env as far as I 
> remeber.

But the version of djgpp.env that users have on their machines, which 
comes from djdev203.zip, does specify CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH, and it points 
to lang/cxx, not lang/cxx-v3.  Won't this break C++ programs, especially 
if the users don't remove previous installation?

> I think it's time to clean this outdated stuff.

Yes, but how can we clean that without releasing a new djdev?

> >   - "cxxfilt --version" says something like
> > 
> >      GNU d:/foo/bar/baz/bin/cxxfilt.exe (C++ demangler), version 3.0
> > 
> >     I think this is ugly; I suggest that the leading directories and
> >     the .exe extension be removed.
>
> It simply outputs argv[0]. Of course it would be possible to call
> basename(argv[0]) for DJGPP only. Only question - is it really needed.

I think it's a good idea not only for DJGPP: if you invoke 
"/foo/bar/bz/cxxfilt --version" on Unix, it will print its full path as 
well.  I think this is ugly.  The intent of that message is to announce 
the _name_ of the program, not its full path.

Granted, this is a minor nuisance, so if you think it's not important, 
feel free to disregard.

- Raw text -