Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 00:59:41 -0500 From: 2boxers <2boxers AT comcast DOT net> Subject: Re: djcrx203.zip refresh (June 2002) To: djgpp-workers-ml Message-id: <002501c28a10$b1612a00$021ca8c0@helm> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <10211120238 DOT AA21596 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com > I haven't heard anything from anyone on this. It's been downloaded > dozens of times, but that may have been by mirrors and web caches. Well, the refresh it is definitely a step in the right direction. I know of at least two different build errors corrected when building the linux host cross compiler against the official gcc releases. > Since it's been 3 weeks, if I don't hear anything negative soon I'll > put it on DJ's incoming to move to Simtel A few comments and questions... All of these questions and comments reference the linux host xgcc targetting djgpp. Documentation: Not that I have anything negative to say about what is included in the refresh or in the djcrx203.zip package, as I have yet to get a satisfactory build from it, but clearly one thing that this updated package release is missing is updated documentation. As a result, the existing faq, howto and readme's do little more than vaguely outline a process that even the most knowledgeable C programmers and linux gurus would characterize as "tricky". At least if there was solid documentation, if you ran into a bug with the build process, you would have a better chance of realizing that it _is a bug_ with sources, perhaps other than djgpp sources, and not be left wondering if there is somthing wrong with your particular build method. One example is limits.h. I am still not 100% clear on how to properly configure the gcc build so that the dj version of limits.h is seen, used and 'fixed' and not other headers that possibly should 'not' be fixed. I have a few general questions that I would appreciate some answers too that pertain to using djcrx203. The patch.lib located in ~/cross... what is it for? I realize it modifies the linker script, but when applied, it causes the libstdc++ build to fail and the compilers not to work. Maybe this question seems foolish, but why is this patch in this package? Is djcrx203.zip meant to be built with vanilla gcc-3.2 and binutils-2.13 sources or does it require gcc32s.zip and bnu213s.zip? What exactly are the differences between the gcc32s from the djgpp file archives and the vanilla fsf gcc-3.2? Can anybody confirm a successful build (again, this refers only to the linux host xgcc build) and C++ function using djcrx203, binutils-2.13, and gcc-3.2? If so, would you care to post a dir -lR * >& file from the $prefix directory where your compiler is installed? This would certainly clarify some things such as file dates, sizes, locations, etc and make things much easier to decipher when working with gnu crossgcc documentation along with djgpp xcompiler build documentation. It has been suggested to me on more than once occasion that I possibly had files in the wrong directories, or the directory names were wrong... So a directory / filelist would prove to be especially helpful if that were the case. Thank you to those that answer and thank you all for the great help you have given me so far. Keep up the good work. Charles Wilkins