Comments: Authenticated sender is <mert0407 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk>
From: "George Foot" <george DOT foot AT merton DOT oxford DOT ac DOT uk>
To: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 23:45:06 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: djlsr and include files
Reply-to: george DOT foot AT merton DOT oxford DOT ac DOT uk
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <E0z8uWH-0006PM-00@sable.ox.ac.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On 18 Aug 98 at 16:23, DJ Delorie wrote:

> > Or is it so that djcrs (ot what its name is, the cross-package)
> > contains everything needed to build djcrs and djdev (so that package
> > is really djlsr)?
> 
> If you are cross compiling, you need djlsr and djcrx.  You should not
> need djdev.
> 
> If you want to build djgpp *with* djgpp, you need djlsr and djdev.
> You should not need djcrx.

Is it not true that using djgpp v2.01 to build v2.02 is more like a
cross compilation than a native build (since ultimately you're not
linking to the v2.01 libraries at all)?  Perhaps djlsr+djcrx is a
better choice for this than djlsr+djdev, if for some reason
(redundancy of information in the download?) you don't want to use
djdev.  djcrx is a lot smaller, though it still contains binaries
(e.g. compiled libraries) of course.

Would it be appropriate to write a User's Guide chapter about the 
library sources?  In this it could be explained for instance exactly 
which files from which zips are necessary for building the sources, 
perhaps along with information on patching the sources, on the 
general layout of the sources, and on how to create your own patches.

-- 
george DOT foot AT merton DOT oxford DOT ac DOT uk