From: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 15:30:18 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: GCC-3.0 related problem with src/libc/stubs/stubXXXX.S
Message-ID: <3B27870A.168.843261@localhost>
References: <3B277595 DOT 25597 DOT 40015F AT localhost>
In-reply-to: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010613150853.17867C@is>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

On 13 Jun 2001, at 15:12, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> 
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote:
> 
> > > Does it help to use -traditional when compiling stub*.S files?  If it 
> > > does, I'd prefer to use tradcpp for the stubs until they fix this in the 
> > > mainline version.
> > 
> > tradcpp doesn't have this bug
> > but tradcpp doesn't like options -remap and -imacros.
> 
> Does that mean that -remap and -imacros don't work with "gcc -traditional"?
> 
> If that is indeed so, I guess we have no other choice but to modify the 
> stubs as you suggested originally.  Tweaking specs for this is too gross, 
> IMHO, and might also cause compatibility problems in the long run.

I don't expect special problems from such modification of specs (I 
simply copied condition from rule how to choose which of cpp0
or tradcpp0 to use). 

gcc -traditional will fail unconditionally unless I exclude both
-remap and -imacros when tradcpp0 is being used. We'll unable to 
compile too much things with gcc -traditional even when we'll
remove these options with tradcpp0. Is it worth to reanimate it
simply to use to compile stubs

Andris