Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 10:43:54 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT ieva01 DOT lanet DOT lv>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Small changes to DJGPP.ENV
In-Reply-To: <Pine.A41.4.05.9906141005390.24354-100000@ieva01.lanet.lv>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990614103651.21962P-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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


On Mon, 14 Jun 1999, Andris Pavenis wrote:

> Adding bin/cpp.exe to gccXXXb.zip will break gcc unless we'll remove
> COMPILER_PATH there.

From your original message I understood that this is only true for
the EGCS distribution, gcc281b.zip is unaffected by this.  Did I 
misunderstand you?

> So if we leave things as they are it will be more hard to add bin/cpp.exe
> if we'll need it for RSXNTDJ or something like in future. Things that can
> break something should be fixed if possible. 

How can we be sure that removing it won't break more things?  This is my 
primary concern for v2.03: I want a stable bug-fix release that would not 
break anything.

If COMPILER_PATH is bad today, wouldn't it affect people who use GCC 
2.8.1, or install RSXNTDJ?  If so, I wonder why don't we hear about such 
problems on c.o.m.d.  Perhaps some other factors are involved here?