From: myknees AT aol DOT com (Myknees) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: LD looks at zip drive Date: 1 Jan 1998 16:46:11 GMT Lines: 83 Message-ID: <19980101164601.LAA18023@ladder01.news.aol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com References: Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk In article , Eli Zaretskii writes: On 31 Dec >1997, Myknees wrote: >> You >>know, I got the sources, and after reading the "readme"s it seems like it >> >>would be so much easier to just "hack the binary" as you put it. > >If we all >would to take the ``easier'' path we would never have DJGPP, >and you could >never use it the way you do now. Well said. >DJGPP is about sharing the fruits of your >work with others. This >sharing works because people who fix a bug, introduce >a feature, or >port another package, make their work available for others. >Sure, it >takes some effort to make things done so that you could share >them. >But IMHO, this sharing is our way to give back to people that >helped >create this software and made it run on MS-DOS/MS-Windows so you and >I >could have it for free. > >If you rebuild Binutils after correcting this >problem, you could ask >DJ Delorie to upload the corrected distribution to >SimTel.NET, where >others could then use it and avoid the problem which just >took us few >days to identify and debug. OTOH, hacking the binary fixes the >things >for you alone (as long as you have drive C:, which some >machines >don't). Honestly, it never occured to me that anyone other than veterans could do stuff like that. It is a bit odd to think of lots of people using binutils that I compiled here on my computer. However, you have convinced me, and you are very right in your ethic. I do appreciate the effort that goes into creating and maintaining all the djgpp stuff. It does make sense that I could take the trouble to get the stuff (fileutils, textutils, sed, bash, etc.) and install them & them build the binutils. I was not kidding, though-- this is going to be a lot of work, since I know nothing about all this stuff. Heck, I don't even have "patch.exe." And I'm going back to work, starting tomorrow, so it will probably be quite a while before I get anything done. If you're up for it, I may even email you (Eli Zaretskii) if I get really stuck. [snipped me complaining about not having stuff already] >Try this. I >think you should not have any problems at all except >installing the necessary >utilities. And I don't think you need to >know how to use Make; you just need >to type "make [Enter]" (after >running the configuration script, as the >instructions should tell >you). I will try that once I get the utilities installed. > Is it dangerous to use LD after hacking it >in this way, i.e. > changing the "e:" to "c:"? > >Not dangerous, just selfish >(no offense intended). None taken. Selfishness is something almost everyone has in some form. It is good when someone else points it out in a constructive way. --Ed (Myknees)