X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From:	"J.W. Jagersma (jwjagersma AT gmail DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: ANNOUNCE: DJGPP port of GNU binutils 2.34 uploaded.
Date:	Thu, 12 Mar 2020 02:25:36 +0100
Organization:	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines:	41
Message-ID:	<b4e2024f-b690-5596-acf2-9df174efae33@gmail.com>
References:	<202003101900 DOT 02AJ0s2L026948 AT delorie DOT com> <88b53f3e-5c10-256f-5a0c-aa942a48c6e9 AT gmail DOT com> <5E694788 DOT 5090308 AT gmx DOT de>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	XM2Ja3Ymg7hMauVi+LQmCA.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT aioe DOT org
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0
X-Notice:	Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Bytes:	3236
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On 2020-03-11 21:18, Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> Am 11.03.2020 15:56, schrieb J.W. Jagersma (jwjagersma AT gmail DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]:
> 
> [snip]
>>>    DJGPP specific changes.
>>>    =======================
>>>    - There are no DJGPP specific changes compared with the previous port.
>>>      The DJGPP specific changes enumerated below are the same than the ones
>>>      already available in the previous port.
>>
>> Are there any plans to have these changes (even partially) upstreamed
>> to GNU?  Because currently the upstream version is unusable even for
>> cross-compiling, primarily due to a missing '_environ' symbol in the
>> ldscripts.
> 
> No, I have no intention to upstream the patch to GNU.  Primary due to my
> limited english skills I do not want to become involved in endless discussions
> about a port that may be considered today as archaic by the maintainers.
> I do not even know if there is still an official COFF and/or djgpp maintainer
> of binutils.
> Neitherless everybody is invited to review the patch and to try to get part
> of it upstreamed into binutils.  I will not interfer nor make any claims on
> it.  If you think you can convince the binutils maintainers to accept parts
> of the patch that make the cross-compiler work again or if you have a better
> solution for the djgpp specific issues, please feel free to go ahaed.
> If there are any other parts of the patch that you think are usefull to get
> included into binutils again, go ahead.

Okay, thanks for clarifying this.  Your position is understandable, I
can see how this could be a lengthy process.

If you don't mind then I might try and submit the patches myself some
time.  At the very least I'd like to see the changes to the ldscripts
merged as that can be an unnecessary source of confusion.  However I
don't know if they allow submitting patches through 3rd parties and how
that would work with regard to copyright.



(BTW, I got caught in the spam filter when I replied by email):
500 Hey, I said not to spam me. <postmaster AT delorie DOT com> 

- Raw text -