Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 12:57:20 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Michel de Ruiter <Michel AT smr DOT nl>
cc: "'djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com'" <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: RE: DJLSR203
In-Reply-To: <B0FEA00E82A7D1118BFB00A0CC990278213501@argon.smr.nl>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000120125227.23652A-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, Michel de Ruiter wrote:

> > > - src/gcc*.opt: why do we still use the -fno-strength-reduce and -m*
> > >   options?
> > Because the library was produced by GCC 2.8.1.  We didn't yet switch
> > to GCC 2.9x for building djdev.
> 
> Ok. I rebuilt it with GCC 2.9x and without those switches myself now.

The *real* problem is to decide what, if anything, do we want to put
there instead of what was used for pre-2.9x versions.  We didn't discuss 
that yet.  I suppose that relevant issues are the various alignment
switches, including the stack alignment, march and mcpu, and perhaps some 
of the optimization options.  All this requires experience with GCC 2.9x 
and it also depends on what Binutils will we have for the next release of 
DJGPP.

> > > - Why are the following still in djgpp.env, can't they do any harm?
> > I don't see anything wrong with these.  They are there mainly for
> > back-compatibility, but they shouldn't do anything bad with latest
> > versions of GCC and Kpathsea/Web2c.  If you think they can do any
> > harm, please explain why.
> 
> I don't think they can, but I remember the docs telling you should not
> have any of them any more in the new versions of TeX and GCC. I see
> that they just should not be *necessary* any more.

That's right, both GCC and TeX don't require them in their latest 
versions.

> Thanks for your time, patience and answers.

Thank *you* for meticulously checking out everything.