Message-ID: <37239134.7BBF3762@lycosmail.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 18:03:32 -0400
From: Adam Schrotenboer <ajschrotenboer AT lycosmail DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: PGCC 1.1.3, what's different????
References: <19990423171922 DOT 15793 DOT qmail AT www0j DOT netaddress DOT usa DOT net> <37218BB3 DOT C34551FD AT home DOT com> <37226C59 DOT 9D580775 AT arcturus DOT resnet DOT rochester DOT edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com

Well, for one thing, it does make me correct (correction needed in machine def). I
had earlier said that it built fine on DJGPP, and I had hypothesize that it was
because the DJGPP people have their own machine defs.

Jason wrote:

> Alexander Rodyukov wrote:
> >
> > ADAM SCHROTENBOER wrote:
> > >
> > > What was changed w/ 1.1.3, other than the fact that it apparrently compiles
> > > now?
> > >
> > > Was the problem fixed, or removed???
> >
> > Hm, pretty stupid question... were you got it?!
> > Latest on their web-site (and ftp) is 1.1.2., latest from CVS
> > was (yesterday):
> >
> > BOLiVAR:/BUILD[$] /BUILD/usr/bin/gcc -v
> > Reading specs from
> > /BUILD/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/pgcc-2.93.17/specs
> > gcc version pgcc-2.93.17 19990405 (gcc2 ss-980929 experimental)
> >
>
> Actually, PGCC 1.1.3 _is_ available.  Despite the name (and what it says on
> the download page), it's still based on EGCS 1.1.2.  The URL, for anybody out
> there who's still trying to compile PGCC 1.1.2, is:
>
> http://www.goof.com/pcg/data/source/egcs-1.1.2-pgcc-1.1.3.diff.gz
>
> The news section of the main page hasn't been updated to reflect the new patch
> (as of this writing), so the release kinda took me by surprise.  :)  However,
> it compiles all the way now!  Kudos to the PCG for fixing it!
>
> In response to Adam's question, I don't know exactly what the new patch fixes
> (perhaps I'll `diff -Naur` the two patches to see what's different).  There
> was a message previously posted here by Rodric Glaser that contained a
> quick-fix patch, which restored some code to the egcs-1.1.2 default.  I
> suspect this was instrumental in fixing PGCC.  For the message, check the
> archives on delorie.com, or (if you want the message _now_) follow this URL:
>
> http://www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi?p=pgcc/1999/04/22/00:25:54
>
> Curse those signed extensions!  ;)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jason
>
> --
> "Is it all journey, or is there landfall?"
>   --Ellison & van Vogt, "The Human Operators"