Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 10:08:46 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Robert Hoehne <robert DOT hoehne AT gmx DOT net>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: BFD docs
In-Reply-To: <35ABE2C0.BB33FED2@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980715100824.10743E-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 14 Jul 1998, Robert Hoehne wrote:

> When I made the ports I thought about that topic and decided to not
> to include the libbfd docs since I also not included the standalone
> libbfd library and having the docs without the library I thought, that
> this is not a good idea, similar to the documentation about the
> libgdb library which is part of the gdb sources and it took me
> about 2 weeks to find out, that this documentation is describing
> a library which is not existent anywhere.

This is correct about libgdb.a, but in contrast, libbfd.a *does*
exist, and I believe its docs describes its actual functionality.

> It installs also libiberty.a, libopcodes.a. Should they also part of
> the bnu???b.zip?

IMHO, yes.  As I said, I believe that everything that can be run and
used on DOS/Windows should be included.  For example, the port of
Sh-utils includes `su', which doesn't do much, and Fileutils include
such no-ops as `chown' and `mknod'.

> Where to place them in the DJGPP directory tree?

I suggest %DJDIR%/lib, as with any other library.