Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>, <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
From:	Richard Hitt <rbh00 AT netcom DOT com>
To:	"Andre Oliveira da Costa" <costa AT cade DOT com DOT br>
Cc:	<cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
Subject:	Re: [mingw32] Re: [RFC] changing gcc default output executable na me (a.exe now)
Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 2000 19:55:16 -0800
Reply-To:	rbh00 AT netcom DOT com
Message-ID:	<l97t7s4bqkik9fhpkfd3l1nrodrttkljli@4ax.com>
References:	<20000113163016 DOT A31403 AT cygnus DOT com> <003201bf5e0e$603c7070$8400000a AT costa DOT cadenet DOT com DOT br>
In-Reply-To:	<003201bf5e0e$603c7070$8400000a@costa.cadenet.com.br>
X-Mailer:	Forte Agent 1.7/32.534
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id WAA31234

Hi all

If such a patch as this goes forward, am I right that the implicit
make(1) rules will be changed at the same time gcc and/or binutils is
changed?  I mean that
	make hello
would by default produce the file "hello" rather than "hello.exe".

And if not, why not?  :-)

Richard




On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 19:37:22 -0200, you wrote:

>> If someone wants to submit a patch to the gcc maintainers I'm sure that
>> they will give it their attention.
>>
>> In fact, if you Cc me, I will talk to people at Cygnus about it and try
>> to advocate that it be installed.
>>
>> I would suggest that somebody who feels strongly about it should start
>> working on this ASAP.
>
>That's good. Any volunteers? I'll try to take a look at it ASAP (which might
>take sometime... please, if anybody else has the chance, feel free to do it
>first). But, who is the actual responsible for appending the .exe suffix,
>gcc or ld? Also, I'd like to propose a change from GCC_SUFFIX to EXE_SUFFIX.
>What do you (Chris, Earnie, cygwin-community) think?
>
>Andre
>--
>André Oliveira da Costa
>(costa AT cade DOT com DOT br)


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -