Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 20:31:16 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu
Message-Id: <2947-Wed26Sep2001203115+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au
In-reply-to: <10109261642.AA14453@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu)
Subject: Re: GCC 3.01 and Win 2K Tesing
References:  <10109261642 DOT AA14453 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
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: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 11:42:09 -0500 (CDT)
> 
> Since 2.04 isn't released yet, I think you should leave it as it is.
> This might indicate the 2.04 libc needs to be tolerent of "links" done
> with 2.03?

The ``symlink'' support from older DJGPP version was not removed from
the current CVS.  It is still supported.

I think the problem is the other way around: whyen, say, a configure
script says "ln -s foo.c bar.c", v2.04-compiled `ln' creates a
new-style symlink that GCC compiled with v2.03 cannot grok, so it
chokes when asked to compile such a file.