Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 10:24:54 +0200 (WET) From: Andris Pavenis To: Eli Zaretskii cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: make depend In-Reply-To: Message-ID: 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, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, Andris Pavenis wrote: > > > -imacros %sdjgpp.ver > > Were we have $prefix/lib/gcc-lib/$version/djgpp.ver > > containing '#include '. Should work > > for both native and cross-compilers however I have > > tested it with native compiler only (yet). > > This file could be distributed with gcc binaries. > > In future we could add $DJDIR/lib/djgpp.ver with > > this contents and we'll be able to remove it from > > DJGPP distribution > > > > Perhaps the last one looks more nice but this is my opinion only > > Does it work with GCC 2.96? If not, what is its advantage as compared to > the current method? > > If it does work with 2.96, then let's switch. Perhaps the name should be > different (since it's an include file); something with a .h extension. > > Btw, what is the reason the current method doesn't work with 2.96? They > didn't remove -imacros, I presume? > I don't know why, but for gcc-2.96 gcc fails to find ../include/sys/version.h (it should searches directories where startup files are located so it should find it as $prefix/lib/../include/sys/version.h) at build time (xgcc -B./ ...). If we'll put djgpp.ver in the same directory where xgcc.exe is located it should work better (by adding make rule for that in gcc/config/i386/t-djgpp). As I said it should work also for cross-compiler. About name: I think it's better to avoid using extension .h there. What name do You suggest? Also with time we could add it to DJDEV (lib/djgpp.ver) Andris