Let's see if we can consolidate some of these threads....
On 10 Nov 2001, at 18:53, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
...(and I thought this was the original question in this sub-thread).
I confess that I've completely lost track of the original question!
On 10 Nov 2001, at 18:56, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
As far as I understood the Chief that's quite hard if not impossible to make sure in all situations.
I'm not sure I understand why "tr -d '\r' ..." won't work in all situations (it certainly works for Cygwin), but, as I noted earlier, I don't believe that doing this is any better or worse than patching gpc.c.
On 10 Nov 2001, at 19:03, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
Is it broken if I choose to use a more reasonable directory structure under Windows (where "/usr" has no meaning) and therefore need to use environment variables?
You don't. Just set prefix in the configure correspondingly:
Hmmm...I have always considered the introduction of run-time variables, as opposed to changing values that are hard-coded in the program, to be a significant advance in the history of computation. ;-)
You want a way by setting an environment variable.
Actually, the original point of argument (I think!) was that Cygwin provided a gcc-2.95.3-x, GPC provided a gpc-2.95.3, and to reconcile the difference, was it better to (a) copy all of the GCC files to the GPC directories, (b) patch and recompile GPC to accommodate the Cygwin numbering scheme, or (c) set GCC_EXEC_PREFIX to point at the GCC installation. The "correct" answer seems to be, "Whichever method you prefer!"
So ... what's the problem, anyway?
Too much time on our hands? ;-)
On 10 Nov 2001, at 21:24, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
As I explained, from the "GCC viewpoint" it does seem reasonable. I suppose if cc1, cpp0 had been installed with GPC by default, no-one would have noticed such a problem at all.
But it isn't just a problem of matching tools, is it? Wouldn't everything, as you say, have to match the compiler version? Wouldn't the C library that will ultimately be linked in, for example, have to be compiled with the same GCC version to be guaranteed compatible? We can't install a GPC (and cc1, etc.) based on gcc-2.95.3 on a system that contains a C library compiled by gcc-2.95.2, can we?
If I understand your point about GCC versions correctly, then *everything* that will be bound in to a given executable must be compiled with the same GCC version. We can't guarantee that unless we supply everything that might be bound in to a given program, so we would have to include both the C library and the Pascal library (because even "pure Pascal" programs are going to pull routines from the C library).
-- Dave