Subject: RE: [mingw32] Re: [RFC] changing gcc default output executable na me (a.exe now)
From: "Andre Oliveira da Costa" <[email-masked]>
To: "Chris Faylor" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 17:58:48 -0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Chris Faylor
> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 5:07 PM
> To: Andre Oliveira da Costa
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [mingw32] Re: [RFC] changing gcc default output executable
> na me (a.exe now)
>
> We were talking about having gcc understand an environment variable or
> command line switch causing it to avoid producing a .exe extension.  It
> is not going to be the default.  Nothing is going to change unless you
> set this.

Looks fine to me, I can live with that ;) Let the default be the current
behavior, and people who don't need/want .exe suffixes automatically
appended to executables (like me) can have some variable set on their
.bashrc files that would turn off this automatic feature.

> Then, of course, the mailing list will be flooded with lots of "newbies"
> who have found out about this nifty new environment variable and who
> 1) have an older version of gcc which doesn't understand it, 2)
> have makefiles
> which add the .exe file explicitly, or 3) are facing in the wrong
> direction
> and are unable to see the computer screen.

[1] they would be on the same situation we are today: they'd like not to
have the .exe appended, but would have to tweak makefiles for that

[2] these should work with no changes, since they are supposedly able to
handle executables with the .exe suffix

[3] these should be killed. Slowly ;)

Regards,

Andre
--
André Oliveira da Costa
([email-masked])

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to [email-masked]