Re: [winegcc01] Don't use BINDIR to spawn subprograms

[Dimitrie O. Paun]

On August 13, 2003 09:49 pm, Richard Cohen wrote:
> Just using $PATH to find stuff makes it much easier to spawn off tools
> when running within the tree.
>
> Changelog:
>         Remove hardcoded BINDIR paths

Yes, this is a problem -- eventually we want to use these things from
within the tree. I guess we can prepend $WINE_HOME/tools to the PATH
within the Makefile. Another way do to it is to look at argv[0], and
if we're running from within the tree, we automatically select the
in-tree tools, rather than the ones from BINDIR.

What do people think, any other suggestions?

[winegcc01] Don't use BINDIR to spawn subprograms

[Richard Cohen]

Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> On August 13, 2003 09:49 pm, Richard Cohen wrote:
> > Just using $PATH to find stuff makes it much easier to spawn off tools
> > when running within the tree.
> >
> > Changelog:
> >        Remove hardcoded BINDIR paths
>
> Yes, this is a problem -- eventually we want to use these things from
> within the tree. I guess we can prepend $WINE_HOME/tools to the PATH
> within the Makefile. Another way do to it is to look at argv[0], and
> if we're running from within the tree, we automatically select the
> in-tree tools, rather than the ones from BINDIR.

I agree with you that we should try to be as consistent with gcc as 
possible. Here gcc<->winegcc and ld<->winewrap.

gcc just calls the ld in the PATH; I don't see any advantage in doing 
anything more complicated.

Richard.

PS. I read wine-devel so you don't have to send emails directly to me as 
well.