This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Is this supposed to work, or am I loopy?
- To: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: Is this supposed to work, or am I loopy?
- From: Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 13:53:08 -0500
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <200101051833.KAA01793@elmo.cygnus.com>
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 10:33:27AM -0800, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Ah, I see. I guess it is a trivial thing to fix. I am not sure if it
> is really important though. Support for the pass through of -R does
> not appear to be documented and there is an official way of passing
> switches to the linker that does work. Not my call really. The patch
> below might make the i386 Linux target consistent with the Sparc
> Solaris target, although there are still plenty of other targets that
> do not support this abbreviation.
That, plus -R<something_that_isn't_a_directory> has an entirely different
meaning under Linux... which I suppose should still be passed through. :-)
Messing about in the config/<arch> directories always gave me the shivers,
so even if this patch doesn't go in, I'll keep it around for reference
and maybe for local users. Thanks.
pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com | pme at sources dot redhat dot com
devphil at several other less interesting addresses in various dot domains
The gods do not protect fools. Fools are protected by more capable fools.