X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
	s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date:
	mime-version; bh=BJbqIX4LF5gT4F0UpxE2Lm2ZFydYBKHdI3YrLEP222Q=; b=hi5WMbkinYdP
	LcVPKAF9C2q+N/6gyrerBWadLYApacu7GzMtDH3TkzTnKWUSgr7e9ig04Ycj4dnQkwbhDgalJP218
	5y0yWFSwWHcjdp31xXavy45d4FoHTsGmgdKNPtZbtOMFREY44QS3ndiQcYrjfqXRuQcTkQgZ16Vct
	MUNztDcJVFMH1YBId5aPpjXhiIiWb7413enqSBt84nMBGtLJuuq7xIVbOIxjG6SKAyLCMxt4mFx+V
	Jsb9pL4UczqFAu8l8xrpjp2qiOkRMNFX+/IrTApZWI9fhn6MMK8WkYNyw+G6gouCJqABN0AR8Gw3o
	kbjTzaFAIGSxI5Q6/d+1uA==;
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2023 15:27:35 +0200
Message-Id: <83ilgqaiwo.fsf@gnu.org>
From: "Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To:
	<CAA2C=vBGAd9mET8PH8wSL1dgoARKSEKMyYa7Whc0iWky2BaZ3A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	(djgpp AT delorie DOT com)
Subject: Re: DXE3 with std::vector
References: <edefcfee-d1ce-415a-8d1d-525a660fb0d5n AT googlegroups DOT com>
 <CAA2C=vCduRPA7Ky-kDqs=QtO-qi=DQczM6FMHhB+=Ltof54P=Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <c934abb6-c11e-0087-cd32-365d25d3f154 AT gmail DOT com> <CAA2C=vCHMXDD8iewRStieHyTcgjGF3=d29LmMT53vrzGYe+zMQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <CACuL_+CZm++qhEr7PedDmQaTxjZu9d-rVSw1bgPeist7XZ+dpQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <CAA2C=vDPwv5G9DeFKyKFqt39cDDmO4LmDtbtMyoMdRR2xeEkow AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <3b8f674c-bca3-c679-952e-f8ba5af196e7 AT gmail DOT com> <CAA2C=vBptnTAy2TA-pj5JCbAUJMiXkAAoP_xYFZZJ99iB7v9mQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <500850be-fd64-3f82-a1e1-929903084e9b AT gmail DOT com> <CAA2C=vA0zXX3Sb49WBzU5g1-8dmO5G5wrb3uT+tLRq2LB0wu5Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <3d9271ae-266d-ee7b-853b-984857ced1c8 AT gmail DOT com> <CAA2C=vD6sZpTicPh0xuJ16r76qBZ5BZro6x=9+=Z+P-0f_eRSA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <f04cd9db-fe76-219c-bacb-47711df559e2 AT gmail DOT com> <CAA2C=vCv_bpM+iinTcreMJD_gv34Rna3jLspiLFfESFuNxOtoA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <af7fa08a-b074-0a4c-5e2f-99299940e3cc AT gmail DOT com> <CAA2C=vB22rof4HPV_dVPy4tVmsmeDMy4G4r2Vx-_YLwOW6C9ug AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <bbdf1853-5454-93b2-fcf9-2306c6949c86 AT gmail DOT com> <CAA2C=vBDi8gwhVVacnhnP+eufCkMNK4DancpOjnD7ScOWCEF6g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <83sffvbux1 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <CAA2C=vAuq+O2gRRM--E0YAPy6D1pLgcP2r0-4+sCLis=kwGYzA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <83mt63azwi DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <CAA2C=vByQZVnfkF_0UX+4p+rcm8uTehwSnM9hSHW-m=Dc4HBtw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <835ycravjo DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <CAA2C=vCauV7VviJ2L+us_4KOgH8TYgEkVtn17hyBxDH5YuddRA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <83zga39fil DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <CAA2C=vCPF_OJkxGxqhQNue0K4j0WQ302GdYSncQydM_EN2kjuA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <83v8kr9bye DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <CAA2C=vCWL4XJaXstSouW5uUdQt2nyX6jTGxBH+Z6cX+=Te4F5Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <83lelmakwk DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <CAA2C=vBGAd9mET8PH8wSL1dgoARKSEKMyYa7Whc0iWky2BaZ3A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> From: "Ozkan Sezer (sezeroz AT gmail DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2023 16:08:52 +0300
> 
> >  I just prefer that we leave those hypothetical people a
> > way of keeping their setups, whatever they are, and I think supporting
> > DJDIR and DXE_LD_LIBRARY_PATH for adding -L options to the command
> > line cannot do any harm to people who use the standard directories,
> > right?
> 
> Was the discussion in this section only about DXE_LD_LIBRARY_PATH and/
> or DJDIR support? (I knew we were speaking about different things :)

Yes, only about that.

> No, I am not against restoring DXE_LD_LIBRARY_PATH and/or DJDIR env
> vars recognition.
> 
> BTW, if I revert the patch and go back to the previous version, -lgcc
> problem can be easily worked around when using a makefile, like:
> LIBGCCDIR = $(dir $(shell $(CC) -print-libgcc-file-name))
> my.dxe:
> 	dxe3gen -o my.dxe -E _sym -U $(OBJS) -L$(LIBGCCDIR) -lgcc
> 
> I even created a documentation patch to dxegen.txi for it. Should we
> really keep the patch in, or revert it?

I'm okay either way.