Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Greg Schafer wrote:
>> Hmmm, interesting. Is this a FSF or HJL thing or both? I've just noticed
>> that Binutils-pass2 also has --disable-nls. Hmm, OK. That is certainly
>> good reason to pass '--disable-nls'.
>
> This is at least for HJL. Not tested with FSF.
I've
Greg Schafer wrote:
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
No, it was added deliberately in order to avoid binutils dependency on
the host gettext.
So Binutils won't build with NLS if Gettext is missing on the host?
Right.
Hmmm, interesting. Is this a FSF or HJL thing or both? I've just noticed
th
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> No, it was added deliberately in order to avoid binutils dependency on
> the host gettext.
So Binutils won't build with NLS if Gettext is missing on the host?
Hmmm, interesting. Is this a FSF or HJL thing or both? I've just noticed
that Binutils-pass2 also has --di
Archaic wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 12:13:07PM +1000, Greg Schafer wrote:
>>
>> "This disables internationalization as i18n is not needed for the temporary
>> tools."
>
> This is an accurate statement.
True.
But it's not accurate in the context I described. If it's to stay it
should at le
Greg Schafer wrote:
Hi
The explanation in Ch 5 Binutils Pass1 for --disable-nls says:
"This disables internationalization as i18n is not needed for the temporary
tools."
This is misleading because only the Pass1's of Binutils and GCC are passed
`--disable-nls'. For the statement to be accurate
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 12:13:07PM +1000, Greg Schafer wrote:
>
> "This disables internationalization as i18n is not needed for the temporary
> tools."
This is an accurate statement. It does not say we need to pass this
everywhere, not does it say we are specifically avoiding i18n in chapter
5. I
