Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 02:37:50 -0400
Message-Id: <200107040637.CAA22203@envy.delorie.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT envy DOT delorie DOT com using -f
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010704093541.3231D-100000@is> (message from Eli
	Zaretskii on Wed, 4 Jul 2001 09:36:44 +0300 (IDT))
Subject: Re: Upload of gcc-3.0 archives
References:  <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010704093541 DOT 3231D-100000 AT is>
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


> What wasn't clear to me was whether GCC invokes the linker with -T under 
> some circumstances.

It does if it uses our specs, which add the -T option.  Well, *added*
because gcc 3.0 does it differently.  We shouldn't be using custom
specs, which means we shouldn't be adding -T.  GCC doesn't add -T by
default unless we tell it to.

> > assuming they use the above method, this will have no effect on them.
> 
> I'm not sure this assumption holds.

Anything which managed to get the right link specs before, should
still get them.  We're only changing defaults, and if you've already
overridden the defaults, changing the defaults shouldn't matter.