This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: who's been mucking with EXEEXT?
- From: Jeff Sturm <jsturm at one-point dot com>
- To: Adam Megacz <gcj at lists dot megacz dot com>
- Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 11:46:33 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: who's been mucking with EXEEXT?
On 27 Aug 2002, Adam Megacz wrote:
> >From the name, that would seem to be the case. However, in real life,
> a non-canadian cross is using the canadian definition. Any idea why
> this is?
No idea.
> On cygwin, I think you can omit .exe, but on mingw ("real windows")
> you definately cannot. However, the gcc in CVS can't be built to run
> on a mingw host (there's a giganto-patch for 2.96 out there), so this
> is probably a non-issue.
That's not quite what I meant. Take this example:
haha$(EXEEXT): haha.java
gcj$(EXEEXT) --main=haha haha.java -o haha$(EXEEXT)
Only the first and last use of EXEEXT are necessary, since they are part
of a filename, not an OS command (in which case .exe is implicit).
Now, libjava/Makefile doesn't use $(GCJH) as a target or prerequisite, so
defining "GCJH = .../gcjh$(EXEEXT)" is just silliness AFAICS.
> > 2002-08-27 Jeff Sturm <jsturm@one-point.com>
> >
> > * Makefile.am (ZIP, GCJH): Remove $(EXEEXT).
>
> This works; can you please check it in?
I suppose it might qualify as an obvious fix, but I'd rather get Tom's or
Bryce's blessing on it first.
Jeff