Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 10:06:08 +0200 (WET)
From: Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
To: Tim Van Holder <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
Cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: RE: Patch for src/mkdoc/makefile
In-Reply-To: <CAEGKOHJKAAFPKOCLHDIEEKJCBAA.tim.van.holder@pandora.be>
Message-ID: <Pine.A41.4.05.10103191000110.82590-100000@ieva06.lanet.lv>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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 Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Tim Van Holder wrote:

> > -	$(GCC) mkdoc.cc -o $@
> > +	$(GCC) mkdoc.cc -lstdcxx -o $@
> >  
> Or you could use $(GXX) I expect; after all, g++ is supposed to
> include all necessary libs. So even if new and delete end up
> in only libsupc++.a, you could still rely on g++ to link with it.
> 

I didn't saw definition of GXX in current makefiles. However adding it 
would perhaps be better than explicit adding of -lstdcxx to makefile in
src/mkdoc/makefile as that could break building djlsrXXX with
cross-compiler as the name of C++ library could also be libstdc++ 

Andris