Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/11/09/03:18:20
On Sun, 8 Nov 1998, Robert Hoehne wrote:
> Maybe there is a little misunderstanding, but the linker script
> djgpp.djl is NOT part of the binutils package, but is part of
> djdev???.zip. The newer gcc distrib (gcc281b.zip) has also a newer
> linker script (where the coff-go32-exe is the default output
> format), but that script is used only, if the user has removed
> the original linker script from the stock DJGPP distribution.
Evidently, people *are* removing lib/djgpp.djl and using the one from
the GCC distribution, since this thread was started by someone
complaining about ginstall.exe which didn't install programs with the
.exe suffix. Several ported source distributions will not install
correctly (people will get programs they cannot invoke from
COMMAND.COM) unless something is done to remedy this.
I didn't have time yet to compare the two versions of djgpp.djl, but I
presume there are more differences between them than just the output
format. If so, users are not really free to decide not to use the
version which comes with GCC, and coff-go32-exe will become the
de-facto standard very fast, if it didn't become already.
In addition, there was a discussion lately on the djgpp-workers list
about these issues, and I understand that the overall intent is to
remove djgpp.djl and specs from djdev, and let them come with GCC
and/or Binutils.
So, if djgpp.djl from GCC *is* the recommended script, let's decide
whether coff-go32-exe should be the default format, and if not, let's
change gcc281b.zip on SimTel. If people think coff-go32-exe *should*
be the default format, I would like to hear why, and discuss possible
implications and alternatives.
OTOH, if the script in gcc281b.zip is not necessary, I suggest to
remove it (and the advice to replace the stock one from djdev) from
the GCC distribution, to avoid confusing the confused and to make our
job of debugging installation problems easier.
- Raw text -