Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 21:32:43 +0300 (WET)
From: Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
To: Matthew Conte <matt AT conte DOT com>
Cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 released
In-Reply-To: <001e01c0ff71$7ff31bc0$e33e1d18@nycap.rr.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.A41.4.05.10106282130400.25830-100000@ieva06.lanet.lv>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk



On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Matthew Conte wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
> 
> > Since the linker script needs to match both the compiler and the
> > linker (and also the library), we might have a situation in the
> > future, perhaps near future, that a new Binutils release will need to
> > modify the linker script, say, to prevent the linker from crashing at
> [...]
> 
> maybe i'm missing the bus on this one, but shouldn't the linker script be
> built-in, anyway?  at least it is on the other main GNU toolchain i am using
> right now (arm-elf).
> 

It should of course. But DJGPP releases of binutils still didn't have 
needed features. So I suggested a way out as a temporary workaround

Andris