Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2011/07/01/04:21:53
On 07/01/2011 10:08 AM, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Andris Pavenis<andris DOT pavenis AT iki DOT fi> wrote:
>> On 07/01/2011 09:56 AM, Andris Pavenis wrote:
>>> On 07/01/2011 09:47 AM, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Andris Pavenis<andris DOT pavenis AT iki DOT fi>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 06/30/2011 11:33 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>>>>>>> (Note to DJ: I know you're probably VERY busy, and I think even an
>>>>>>> email or two to you bounced recently, ugh. So feel free to ignore
>>>>>>> this. And yes I see your online compiler thingy hack is offline too,
>>>>>>> heh.)
>>>>>> Yeah, I upgraded delorie.com and a few things stopped working. I need
>>>>>> to build a newer compiler anyway, I think that one is still gcc 2.7 !
>>>>> Not as I really use online compiler feature, but my cross-compiler
>>>>> RPMs (all latest versions including not yet announced 4.6.1) is
>>>>> expected to work without problems in Linux distribution installed
>>>>> currently on delorie.com. So hopefully there is no need to build a
>>>>> new cross-compiler as one can simply install RPM packages.
>>>>>
>>>> A little side tracking:
>>>>
>>>> Andris: I'm using your src rpms as a reference for my own djgpp stuff.
>>>> However I wonder what is the purpose of djcross-binutils-coffcode.diff ?
>>>> It conditionally defines COFF_PAD_SECTION_HEADERS and compiles
>>>> some extra code, however __MSDOS__ is never defined and the code
>>>> is never compiled. Am I missing something?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It was intended to avoid putting random garbage from memory into
>>> executable.
>>>
>>> You do not need to define __MSDOS__. DJGPP port of GCC does it for You
>>>
>>> [andris AT ap2 ~]$ i586-pc-msdosdjgpp-gcc -E -dD -x c /dev/null | grep MSDOS
>>> #define __MSDOS 1
>>> #define __MSDOS__ 1
>>> #define MSDOS 1
>>>
>>> Andris
>>>
>> Forgot to mention: it was for native binutils only, but I prefer to have the
>> same source also
>> for cross-binutils. In future I may add sometimes building native binutils
>> for DJGPP when
>> building cross-binutils RPMs (perhape not enabled by default, would require
>> something like --define 'build_native 1' in rpmbuild command line)
>>
>
> I really am using cross tools only. So, that part isn't actually needed
> for cross toolchains, am I reading you correctly?
There is however no harm from having it.
Ths situation is similar also with DJGPP port of GCC - cross-compiler
SRPM have all patches including those used for native compiler only.
Side product of building cross-compiler RPMs is also GCC source
archive for DJGPP (which I move to Windows for building native compiler)
Andris
- Raw text -