From: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:33:33 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: gcc2952s.zip
Message-ID: <38E8ABBD.4707.2C5FCE@localhost>
In-reply-to: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000402095701.9367T-100000@is>
References: <r1f5esorc7bf16ke7calk2qe1idvti21if AT 4ax DOT com>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On 2 Apr 2000, at 9:57, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> 
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, Damian Yerrick wrote:
> 
> > >Also LFN support IS required (so You need Win95 or Win98 to build
> > >DJGPP port of gcc-2.95.2).
> > 
> > So the "free software" status of DJGPP is contingent on the purchase
> > of Microsoft(R) Windows(R) 95 or Microsoft(R) Windows(R) 98?  That
> > bugs me.
> 
> Then how about sitting down and making it possible to build GCC
> without long file names?  In my experience, it's never hard to achieve
> that.  I did that for many packages, including some that are very
> complex, like Binutils and GDB.  Others have done similar things for
> other packages.
> 
> I'm sure that Andris will happily accept patches to make this happen.

Main problem: 
we'll not able to get binary distribution identical to one
we'll get with LFN support.  Therefore I prefer cross-building under
Linux (instead of doing that under plain DOS). 

Andris