Le jeudi 31 janvier 2013 14:53:42, grischka a écrit : > Thomas Preud'homme wrote: > >> Maybe we should just put bcheck.o into libtcc1.a (and thus make via > >> the rules of lib/Makefile). Unless there is a reason why we > >> shouldn't. > > > > Yes but that doesn't change the general assumption that we are compiling > > tcc with gcc. If --cc is specified at configure time, then CFLAGS and > > CPPFLAGS should be set when running make (make CPPFLAGS=foo CFLAGS=bar) > > Sure, but if you want to solve the --cc=tcc/clang problem then the > question with using what compiler for libtcc1.a needs to be answered, > and also whether it makes sense to treat bcheck.o separately.
Sure. > > Are you sure that putting an hash link to an not-existing name entry > is the right way to deal with a malformed elf file? No, again you're right. I got over zealous in trying to address anything that was shown to me. I should have taken the cautious approach and later look at all the surrounding code. Thanks for your vigilance ;) Best regards, Thomas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
