Re: GCC dependencies (attn David Billinghurst)

["Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" <yselkowitz@users.sourceforge.net>]

On Sat, 2011-08-13 at 16:11 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > BTW, for those interested, I'm already working on updating the Fedora
> > Cygwin toolchain to match the recent binutils/gdb releases and add the
> > --large-address-aware patch, along with restoring cygwin-gcc-java for
> > F15.

FYI, this has been pushed to the servers now.

> There's a small glitch in the cross toolchain:
> 
>   $ i686-pc-cygwin-gcc foo.c -o foo
>   $ ls foo*
>   foo  foo.c

Confirmed, and now I see that the same happens with Fedora's
mingw32-gcc.

> Since foo is a Cygwin executable, shouldn't gcc append .exe?

This would make sense.  Since mingw32-gcc does the same thing, I'll
guess that the .exe magic was only implemented for a native compiler.

Looking at the code, the .exe handling is added in gcc/gcc.c.  There are
two macros: HOST_EXECUTABLE_SUFFIX (which adds .exe to the commands it
calls (cc1/as/collect2/ld), and TARGET_EXECUTABLE_SUFFIX, which is used
only for and in convert_filename() to change the output filename.  But
the latter is only used if:

/* By default there is no special suffix for target executables.  */
/* FIXME: when autoconf is fixed, remove the host check - dj */
#if defined(TARGET_EXECUTABLE_SUFFIX) && defined(HOST_EXECUTABLE_SUFFIX)
#define HAVE_TARGET_EXECUTABLE_SUFFIX
#endif

I may be new to the GCC code, but that just looks bogus.  On Linux,
HOST_EXECUTABLE_SUFFIX is obviously empty, but why should that control
HAVE_TARGET_EXECUTABLE_SUFFIX?

I've made a patch to change that, and am rebuilding cygwin-gcc with that
now.  If it works (and I don't see why it won't), I'll go ahead and
respin releases with the patch.

Dave, anything to add here?


Yaakov