Re: gcc 2.8.1

[Konrad Kokoszkiewicz <draco@mi.com.pl>]

> KK>My question comes from the fact that I installed Chris' 2.8.1, but, I
> KK>don't have a particular lust to rename libraries on every upgrade. So I am
> 
> I didn't have to rename any single lib, IIRC. "libc.a" and derivates are
> standard library names for MiNT, aren't they? I have to rename just
> newly compiled libs (gnu.olb -> libc.a).

Yes, they are. And 2.7.2 particularly accepted libc.a, while the 2.8.1
here insists to search for libgnu.a instead. Besides, the 2.7.2 seemed to
automatically select 68020 compiled libraries when they were named
appropriately. Like it linked libc.a for -m68000 and libc020.a for
-m68030. 2.8.1 doesn't seem to do that, perhaps something is missing
somewhere in specs?

> But I noticed something else - the gcc 2.8.1 reports errors on different
> line numbers than they really are. It's somehow related to number of
> #include lines in the particular .c file. You all don't have this problem?

Aside from that, I had yesterday problems with compiling MiNT with
-fstrength-reduce -fexpensive-optimizations. It compiled fine but linker
complained a lot on hundreds (!) of undefined symbols referenced from
text. When I removed both switches, everything has been linked OK.

--
Konrad M.Kokoszkiewicz
|mail: draco@mi.com.pl                  | Atari Falcon030/TT030/65XE |
|http://www.orient.uw.edu.pl/~conradus/ | ** FreeMiNT development ** |

** Ea natura multitudinis est,
** aut servit humiliter, aut superbe dominatur (Liv. XXIV,25)
*************************************************************
** U pospolstwa normalne jest, ze albo sluzy ono unizenie,
** albo bezczelnie sie panoszy.