Subject: Re: W2K/XP fncase
From: Tim Van Holder <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Cc: Charles Sandmann <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1011015134444.24690A-100000@is>
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1011015134444 DOT 24690A-100000 AT is>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Evolution/0.15.99+cvs.2001.10.05.05.19 (Preview Release)
Date: 15 Oct 2001 17:16:58 +0200
Message-Id: <1003159030.28450.105.camel@bender.falconsoft.be>
Mime-Version: 1.0
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 Mon, 2001-10-15 at 13:48, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On 15 Oct 2001, Tim Van Holder wrote:
> 
> > I'd also vote for not downcasing files without extension.  My main gripe
> > with the current FNCASE=n situation is that is downcases names like
> > BUGS, COPYING, README, INSTALL, etc.  I'm not sure if there are many
> > such files on a typical DOS system where downcasing _would_ be good
> > thing.
> 
> Unfortunately, raw COFF files produced by the linker don't have 
> extensions, as well as shell scripts.

Right.  Though if you have a file like 'autoconf' under WinME, you'll
probably have an LFN entry for it (all lowercase), while 'README' would
not have an LFN entry.  So maybe we could skip downcasing for
extensionless files on LFN=y only?

> If we don't downcase COFF files, Make will always want to remake all
> targets like this:
> 
>   foo: foo.o
> 	$(CC) $(LDFLAGS) $< -o $@ $(LOADLIBES)

True - but that's the same as the situation where gcc creates foo.exe
instead of foo.

> Even worse, targets like below will always fail:
> 
>   all: foo

Why?  make would run the commands for the `foo' rule, which would work
(though it may have relinked when it didn't need to).  And the implicit
foo-from-foo.[co] rule would also work.
In any case, we should fix such makefiles to use $(EXEEXT) when porting,
IMHO, making this point moot.