who's been mucking with EXEEXT?

[Jeff Sturm]

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