Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/11/09/03:18:00
On Sun, 8 Nov 1998, Marco Talamanca wrote:
> cxxfilt.exe and gxx.exe. The 'old' cxxfilt is from BNU281, is actually
> older by six months and a little smaller: clearly it seems superceeded by
> the cxxfilt provided with GPP281.
It doesn't matter, they both have the same functionality. (I think
the ``older'' one actually is an improved version, but I am not sure.)
> I assume similarly that the newer gxx
> from DJDEV202 superceeds the one from GPP281, but I'm not completely sure,
> since it is almost half the size of the former and GPP281 is fairly
> recent, 22/10/98. Am I correct?
These two are completely different programs with a different
functionality. The new gxx.exe is a complete driver, much like
gcc.exe, but with different defaults regarding the libraries it
instructs the linker to scan. The older gxx.exe is just a wrapper
around gcc.exe which adds several C++ libraries to the link command
line.
IMHO, it is unfortunate that gpp281b.zip have chosen to call that
program by the gxx.exe which was already taken by the version from
djdev. I think this adds an unnecessary complication and confusion to
DJGPP installation.
> Am I also correct in having understood that the outcome of the discussion
> about which specs and .djl files to use is of using those wich cames from
> DJDEV202 instead of those from GPP281?
This issue is not resolved yet (AFAIK). If you use the one from GCC,
you will have to edit it, since the __DJGPP_MINOR__ is defined
incorrectly.
IMHO, you also need to decide whether you want to use djdev202, which
is still in early beta. If you do, be prepared for some manual
tweaking and extra debugging (and please report any problems you see).
- Raw text -