Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Dixitur illum ih8mj@fjf.gnu.de scribere...
gnu make. This is more a Unix philosophy than a C one.
^^^ Note that this produced a hiccup on part of some readers. Please don't assume the world consists only of ILP32, ELF, #include <linux.h> and stuff like that.
If you point out such things, it may be useful to set attributions correctly. I didn't write the above.
FWIW, as I wrote, I won't do as Chuck suggested here for other reasons, so this issue is actually irrelevant now.
output etc.). If we teach "GP" to pass `-lm -lgpc', we could get rid of the separate gpc executable and call "GP" gpc. But I'm not sure if everybody would be comfortable with such a change ...
Actually, that idea crossed my mind earlier, and it sounds more natural. I was always wondering why you didn't just use the gcc driver, except for maybe some more esoteric features (which can be done by the now-gp thing then).
Basically because "everybody" does it, i.e. each frontent has its own such driver AFAIK. But that's not a coercing point, of course. And, as I said, we could still offer the (current) gpc driver (without automake) under another (and even longer, AFAIC ;-) name.
Frank