From: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:56:31 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: GCC: DJGPP bootstrap fix + define MSDOS
Message-ID: <3A82A58F.30729.824B03@localhost>
In-reply-to: <9003-Thu08Feb2001203927+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
References: <3A8276B4 DOT 22740 DOT 2F391B AT localhost> (snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com)
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
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

> If people don't mind requiring Binutils 2.10 for GCC 3.0, I guess it's
> okay to remove -mbnu210.

It would required for C++ since it emits weak symbols if support is detected 
when configuring. I may be wrong, but C shouldn't require 2.10 because it 
doesn't emit weak symbols unless you explicitly ask it to with 
'__attribute__((weak))'.

> Are we sure that this is the only implication of this removal?

Yes, because it was added to handle bnu 2.10 at a time when a release seemed 
far off. Thankfully, someone stepped in to handle releases when Ian 
said he couldn't.

Mark