Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sourceware.cygnus.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com From: Richard Hitt To: "Andre Oliveira da Costa" Cc: 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@netcom.com Message-ID: References: <20000113163016.A31403@cygnus.com> <003201bf5e0e$603c7070$8400000a@costa.cadenet.com.br> In-Reply-To: <003201bf5e0e$603c7070$8400000a@costa.cadenet.com.br> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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@cade.com.br) -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com