Message-ID: <20010109142714.226.qmail@lauras.lt> From: "Laurynas Biveinis" Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 16:27:14 +0200 To: "Mark E." Cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: possible bootstrap fix Mail-Followup-To: "Mark E." , djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com References: <3A5A63B5 DOT 20609 DOT 8652F1 AT localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3A5A63B5.20609.8652F1@localhost>; from snowball3@bigfoot.com on Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 01:04:53AM -0500 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 On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 01:04:53AM -0500, Mark E. wrote: > Hello Laurynas, > I think I have a fix for the seemingly random occurance of inappropriate > arguments being passed to the programs xgcc calls. It works for me. Let me > know if it works for you. Thanks! It really helped. Please submit it to GCC ASAP. BTW, GCC is going to branch for 3.0 release on Jan 14, and there is still a lot of DJGPP work to do. I will do what I can, but I have my exams on this week too. What a fine coincidence :-(. And here is my todo: 1) Top priority: libstdc++-v3 port. I've patched libtool, and created necessarry config and autobuild files. It still does not build, but I'll try to fix it ASAP. 2) Top priority: xvalloc: currently it wastes twice the allocated memory. This means windows users can use only 32MB for GCC. Not too good, to say the least. Zack Weinberg (GCC developer) was working on this, but I'm not sure if it will make it to official 3.0. But I think we will have to add DJGPP-specific patches anyway for DJGPP release. 3) Configure/build scripts - it would be best to do without them, by proper defines in config/mh-djgpp, configure.in etc. etc. 4) Building without LFN - djunpack.bat from GDB should be made general, make a list of SFN names for unpacking, sedding makefile and here we go. 5) Other than C++ runtime libs.... 6) ???