Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2001/10/15/11:20:14
On Mon, 2001-10-15 at 13:48, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> On 15 Oct 2001, Tim Van Holder wrote:
>
> > I'd also vote for not downcasing files without extension. My main gripe
> > with the current FNCASE=n situation is that is downcases names like
> > BUGS, COPYING, README, INSTALL, etc. I'm not sure if there are many
> > such files on a typical DOS system where downcasing _would_ be good
> > thing.
>
> Unfortunately, raw COFF files produced by the linker don't have
> extensions, as well as shell scripts.
Right. Though if you have a file like 'autoconf' under WinME, you'll
probably have an LFN entry for it (all lowercase), while 'README' would
not have an LFN entry. So maybe we could skip downcasing for
extensionless files on LFN=y only?
> If we don't downcase COFF files, Make will always want to remake all
> targets like this:
>
> foo: foo.o
> $(CC) $(LDFLAGS) $< -o $@ $(LOADLIBES)
True - but that's the same as the situation where gcc creates foo.exe
instead of foo.
> Even worse, targets like below will always fail:
>
> all: foo
Why? make would run the commands for the `foo' rule, which would work
(though it may have relinked when it didn't need to). And the implicit
foo-from-foo.[co] rule would also work.
In any case, we should fix such makefiles to use $(EXEEXT) when porting,
IMHO, making this point moot.
- Raw text -