Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:12:23 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
Message-Id: <1190-Fri16Feb2001221223+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.6
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, zeus AT nofrendo DOT org
In-reply-to: <3A8CF9FC.21062.9A92D@localhost> (snowball3@bigfoot.com)
Subject: Re: possible objcopy problem.
References: <000901c097cf$691ff3a0$8c971918 AT nycap DOT rr DOT com> (zeus AT nofrendo DOT org) <3A8CF9FC DOT 21062 DOT 9A92D AT localhost>
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

> From: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 09:59:24 -0500
> 
> It looks like someone also found the same problem and found a solution:
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2001-02/msg00381.html

Yes, but I don't understand why the solution calls for a new
command-line argument.  Isn't the target format (COFF in our case)
enough to let BFD set the architecture?