X-Authentication-Warning: new-smtp1.ihug.com.au: Host p20-tnt1.syd.ihug.com.au [203.173.128.20] claimed to be acceleron
Message-ID: <005401c10c04$124ccc70$0a02a8c0@acceleron>
From: "Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
To: <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
References: <2427-Wed11Jul2001195622+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <3B4DF103 DOT 11332 DOT D60645 AT localhost> <2593-Thu12Jul2001220335+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Subject: Re: Comments on GCC 3.0 distribution
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 11:26:55 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

> > From: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
> > Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:48:35 +0300
> >
> > Maybe. Anyway I would want to hear some more feedback about
> > binaries of gcc-3.0. I built them using current (at that time) CVS
> > version of DJGPP.
>
> Is it wise to distribute such a major part of the development
> toolchain that is based on a relatively untested library?  For
> example, we've just learned that it will be unable to read any files
> on Windows 2000 due to the FAT32 bit in _open.
>
> There might be other problems and incompatibilities, for example in
> the symlink support.

I thougth I would add this to my list of items to check once I get RHIDE
built.

I had a quick test on the Win2K box and performed the following quickn test:
1) Setup a symlink "ln -s d:\djgpp\bin\zip.exe d:\djgpp\bin\z.exe"
2) Execute zip.exe to ensure that the help was displayed
3) Execute z (or z.exe) and it worked the same as executing zip.exe
4) Files from the DJGPP bin directory were:

D:\djgpp\bin>ls -la --color z*.*
-rwxr-xr-x   1 dosuser  root         2048 Jul 14 11:20 z.exe
-rwxr-xr-x   1 dosuser  root        86868 Dec 24  1999 zip.exe

The ln.exe file is:
-rwxr-xr-x   1 dosuser  root       133632 May 26  2000 ln.exe

Is the test above correct? Are there any other tests I should do to check
that symlinks work fully under Win2K? Where do I find these tests?

Andrew