delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f |
From: | sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann) |
Message-Id: | <10112032126.AA14791@clio.rice.edu> |
Subject: | Distribution issues (was: Re: Building a profiled version of libc) |
To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il |
Date: | Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:26:37 -0600 (CST) |
Cc: | broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de (Hans-Bernhard Broeker) |
In-Reply-To: | <2110-Mon03Dec2001213522+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Dec 03, 2001 09:35:22 PM |
X-Mailer: | ELM [version 2.5 PL2] |
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 |
> And the problem is that specs is in the GCC distribution, while > libc_p.a, if we decide to distribute one, will be in djdev. > > What I was saying was that these two changes must be in sync, > otherwise users will have broken installations. At the very least, > we must release djdev with libc_p.a first, and modify specs some time > after that. When we refresh 2.03, should we put a stub libc_p.a in there? Is a stub a new feature? (The null libraries such as libpc.a take around 500 bytes). By the way, should the .dsm be in the .mft?
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |