Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.0.20001117140236.02ba92f0@pop5.banet.net>
X-Sender: usbanet DOT farley3 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:08:06 -0500
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
From: "Peter J. Farley III" <pjfarley AT banet DOT net>
Subject: Re: Help: Isn't libdbg the debugging version of libc?
Cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <1190-Fri17Nov2000203503+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
References: <5 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 4 DOT 0 DOT 20001117121959 DOT 03459ad0 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net>
 <5 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 4 DOT 0 DOT 20001116230739 DOT 00a55af0 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net>
 <5 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 4 DOT 0 DOT 20001116230739 DOT 00a55af0 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net>
 <5 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 4 DOT 0 DOT 20001117121959 DOT 03459ad0 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

At 08:35 PM 11/17/00 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
<Snipped>
 >No, I didn't mean for you to go to such great lengths.  It suffices 
to
 >make a change that will work no matter where's libgcc.a located in 
the
 >DJGPP tree.

Ah.  I've already read your more complete explanation below; that 
technique should be much easier to set up than I first imagined.

 >> -LINK = ld $(LDFLAGS) $^ -o $@ ${LIB}/libgcc.a -T
 >${TOP}/../../lib/djgpp.djl
 >> +LINK = ld $(LDFLAGS) $^ -o $@ ${LIB}/gcc-lib/djgpp/2.952/libgcc.a 
-T
 >${TOP}/../../lib/djgpp.djl
 >
 >Hmmm... this is not a very good idea: it will break if you use any
 >other version of GCC but 2.95.2.
<Tricky problem solution snipped>

That seems quite a nice solution.  I will try to work up a patch using 
that technique.

 >> gcc ... -c spawnvp.c
 >> Load error: no DOS memory
 >> make.exe[3]: *** [spawnvp.o] Error 1
 >> make.exe[2]: *** [all_subs] Error 2
 >> make.exe[1]: *** [all] Error 2
 >> make.exe: *** [subs] Error 2
 >>
 >> Just restarting "make" gets around this.  Maybe this is a memory 
leak
 >> in makemake?
 >
 >No, it's a resource leak in Windows (which is where I understand you
 >have run this).  See section 3.3 of the FAQ.

Yes, I am running in a DOS box under W98SE.  I'm (sort of) glad it's 
Bill's problem and not ours... ;)

Thanks again, Eli.

---------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org OR
                      pjfarley AT banet DOT net)