On Tue, 19 May 2020, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > I don't think the error should mention .exe, but I also don't think the > > error should mention collect2 (see what I said in > > <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg01772.html>, the existence > > of collect2 is an implementation detail). > > I'm not changing collect2, at least not in this patch, but I wouldn't > mind making the match for the internal executable name optional. WDYT? > Untested patch follows.
Allowing a missing executable name is reasonable enough, but I was actually thinking that the messages should print "gcc" or whatever command the user ran in place of "collect2". -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
