Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 08:25:34 +0300 (WET) From: Andris Pavenis To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: dj AT delorie DOT com, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 released In-Reply-To: <2110-Thu21Jun2001213135+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> Message-ID: 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 Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 19:32:45 +0300 (WET) > > From: Andris Pavenis > > > > > > > > > > Seems we have some showstopper: > > > > djgpp.djl from djdev203.zip is incompatible with gcc-3.0 (one from > > > > current CVS is OK). There is no other known problems with > > > > djdev203 > > > > djgpp.djl from djdev203.zip doesn't contains all section names which are > > used. As result linker does bad things when linking. It was taken into > > account in CVS version some months ago > > Sorry, I'm not sure I understand: are you talking about the DJGPP CVS? Yes. I'm talking about djgpp.djl from DJGPP CVS > > > > > I can workaround that by small modifications: > > > > changing specs to use djgpp-x.djl (or some similar name) instead > > > > of djgpp.djl > > > > put CVS version of djgpp-x.djl in the same directory where specs, > > > > cc1.exe, etc > > > > > > > > I can say simplier: I can workaround that by providing replacement > > for djgpp.dlj. Different name is choosed to avoid possibility to use > > incompatible one. > > Assuming that the necessary changes are already in the DJGPP CVS, I'd > suggest to put that version into the GCC distribution, and let it > unzip into %DJDIR%/lib and replace whatever version of djgpp.djl is > there. This will prevent problems with future upgrading to newer > versions of Binutils and DJGPP. > > I'm assuming that the new djdgpp.djl won't do any harm with older > versions of GCC (so that people could still use several different > versions of GCC on the same machine). Is that assumption true? > True. Anyway using the same name may cause problems if one unzips djdev203.zip after gcc30b.zip. We had this rather long time ago with gcc-2.8.1 (to start supporting C++ exceptions) and had to explain this in readme file (which is still not read by many users). I think using a different name is more safe and also harmless enough and does not require writting special instructions. I'm going to install it with gcc30b.zip in lib/gcc-lib/djgpp/3.0 so even if we'll have to do that some more time in future there will be no need to change name any more Andris