X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f X-Received: by 10.129.74.138 with SMTP id x132mr23425935ywa.27.1494106079899; Sat, 06 May 2017 14:27:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.157.39.138 with SMTP id c10mr986979otb.9.1494106079859; Sat, 06 May 2017 14:27:59 -0700 (PDT) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Date: Sat, 6 May 2017 14:27:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201703111637.v2BGb983025211@delorie.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=84.82.215.132; posting-account=JWQfLgoAAAC8QKtkzNbcIxeduALJ3mlU NNTP-Posting-Host: 84.82.215.132 References: <201703111637 DOT v2BGb983025211 AT delorie DOT com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <70daacd2-b406-4446-8684-ca624011a84f@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: DJGPP port of GNU binutils 2.28 uploaded. From: "jwjagersma AT gmail DOT com [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" Injection-Date: Sat, 06 May 2017 21:27:59 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Bytes: 2095 Lines: 16 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id v46Lj1AL014424 Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk I built and installed binutils-2.28 (and gcc-7.1.0) from ftp.gnu.org the other day, assuming it would be identical to the djgpp release. Turns out, the linker scripts it installs are somewhat different - they don't define the "_environ" symbol, which caused undefined reference errors when linking with libc. Anyhow, just curious, why aren't these packages kept in sync with the "official" gnu releases? Also, >The linker script has been adapted to discard LTO sections created by the >compiler if the -flto flag is passed to the compiler. This is due to LTO >specific file names that are not 8.3 clean especially if the -save-temps >option is used. This may change in the future when the djgpp port of the >compiler fully supports LTO. Does that also apply to cross-compilers (which have no trouble dealing with long file names)? Can I safely remove that line, in that case?