Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:13:39 -0500
Message-Id: <199903101813.NAA08250@envy.delorie.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT envy DOT delorie DOT com using -f
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <658F56E5.19990310190340.FOO-61CD.frank@goedel.fjf.gnu.de>
	(message from Frank Heckenbach on Wed, 10 Mar 1999 19:03:40 +0100)
Subject: Re: DJGPP preprocessor and link command specs
References:  <658F56E5 DOT 19990310190340 DOT FOO-61CD DOT frank AT goedel DOT fjf DOT gnu DOT de>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


gcc should dump the right specs, yes, so that external specs aren't
required at all.  However, if we choose to go this way, we should
remove the DJGPP_MINOR definition (I don't see a djgpp 3.0 in the near
or medium future, so that one can stay :)

> I don't know what is supposed to be the right solution, but to me it
> would seem most natural if the DJGPP compiler would dump exactly
> those specs that it needs.