From: Paul S. <pf...@us...> - 2001-01-17 21:47:55
|
Hello Mumit, Mumit Khan wrote on Wednesday, January 17, 2001: MK> On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Earnie Boyd wrote: >> BTW, I created this patch using CVS. Two of the files which IFOTTOMH, >> header files, had your patches already applied. The gcc/configure file >> had hunks fail so I just deleted it and recreated the configure script. MK> I usually never patch configure, but rather re-create it. It depends on MK> version of autoconf and all that. >> I know that the patch was used in a Linux cross-compiler. They had >> problems applying the patch because of a directory named INCLUDE and >> another directory named include. The INCLUDE came first, of course, so >> that's where the files for include went when I unarchived 2.95.2. MK> Ah, the usual case problems. Btw, you mentioned about changing '\' to MK> '/' in the binary. Any particular reason? Fortunately, underlying API MK> works with either, but I'm curious. To help libtool, autoconf, etc? Exactly. With '\', the dependencies generated by automake (via gcc -MM) were choked upon by make. Btw, we tried to use bugtracker in SF to write down what problems were spotted and how they were fixed, if were. MK> If so, I'd like to get those tools fixed as well. MK> The latest Cygwin binutils works quite well. I have a few tiny changes MK> in the last few days of poking around, but now need to test those before MK> forwarding those on. MK> I can actually build mingw natively using the now long forgotten and MK> neglected port of glibc2 and associated tools. It's sad how much I've MK> forgotten about these things, sigh. MK> Is there sufficient interest in a gcc-2.95.3 release? If you want my opinion, that would have more priority than glibc stuff. As I wrote above, we more or less did something with mingw32 runtime, w32api, binutils, but noone taken gcc, so I just was trying to fix existing distro with axe. MK> Regards, MK> Mumit -- Paul Sokolovsky, IT Specialist http://www.brainbench.com/transcript.jsp?pid=11135 |