This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: Fix for i686-pc-cygwin bootstrap failure
- To: "'law at cygnus dot com'" <law at cygnus dot com>
- Subject: RE: Fix for i686-pc-cygwin bootstrap failure
- From: "Billinghurst, David (CRTS)" <David dot Billinghurst at riotinto dot com dot au>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 23:32:52 -0000
- Cc: "'gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
This definitely falls into the second case. Will check.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeffrey A Law [SMTP:law@cygnus.com]
> Sent: Monday, 17 July 2000 19:31
> To: Billinghurst, David (CRTS)
> Cc: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org'
> Subject: Re: Fix for i686-pc-cygwin bootstrap failure
>
>
> In message
> <A9E96A79C068D211A6A90000C07BDF0D4D4DC4@crtsmail.crts.techaust.rio
> tinto.com.au>you write:
> > This patch to gcc/f/Make-lang.in is required to bootstrap
> > egcs-20000619 on i686-pc-cygwin. Without it, attempt to
> > "rm f/intdoc f/ansify f/intdoc.h0" fails.
> >
> >
> >
> > 2000-06-25 David Billinghurst <David Billinghurst@riotinto.com.au>
> >
> > * Make-lang.in: Add $(exeext) to intdoc and ansify
> This seems wrong.
>
> $exeext should be used for programs which are going to be run on the
> machine where the "gcc", "g++" and related binaries are run.
>
> $build_exeext should be used for programs which are going to be run on
> the machine building gcc itself (like gen*).
>
> I believe the programs you're referring to are of the second category and
> should be using $build_exeext.
>
> Can you try that and verify that cygwin bootstraps?
>
> Thanks,
> jeff