From: drupp AT cs DOT washington DOT edu (Douglas Rupp)
Message-Id: <199607310628.XAA09018@june.cs.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: gcc -g -o
To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 23:28:25 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: drupp AT cs DOT washington DOT edu, dj AT delorie DOT com, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960731081533.1793E-100000@is> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Jul 31, 96 08:17:26 am
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> 
> On Unix, gcc without -g does NOT strip the binary.  If ours will, that 
> would be a deviation from the normal behavior, which might bite you if 
> you use Makefiles that come from Unix.
> 

That's right, but what is normal behavior?  Different flavors of Unix treat
the -g flag differently when it's passed to ld. Some ignore it, some don't.
I'm trying to argue that it's reasonable for us to do something with it.
Also if you are using a Unix Makefile it's likely the link command will
be somehting like "-o foo" (not "-o foo.exe") in which case you will have
the unstripped coff file preserved in any case.  I'm only proposing that
the lack of -g cause the .exe to be stripped.