Re: [cc65] Search path priority

From: Ullrich von Bassewitz <>
Date: 2012-10-24 23:13:56

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 04:13:37PM +0200, Uffe Jakobsen wrote:
> As far as I can see that works for cc65 and ca65 - but not ld65.
> With ld65 I cannot see an option that makes it forget its compiled
> paths - or did I miss anything ?

Yes, you did miss something. For ld65 it is not necessary, because you specify
libraries and object files on the command line (not in source files). Just
name the libraries with the correct path and they will be used.

> If I understand you correct:
> This requires every developer to be aware of this "feature" - and
> plaster his makefiles with options compensating for the current
> search path approach - if not his project will not work properly in
> situations that I described in the initial email.

While your idea requires the developer to be aware of the feature and switch
environment variables. I cannot see why this is so advantageous.

> Is there any compelling reason for not changing the search path
> priority as suggested ?

I have no problems changing the search path algorithm (again) if this is a
popular request. But I doubt that this has real advantages, because it
requires users with more than one compiler version to adjust the environment
variables and this is as error prone as any other solution.

> It sounds to me that this feature would ease
> up your own development and shorten your makefiles considerably ;-)

No, it won't. Most of my test code (or library routines) are bound to one
specific compiler version. Anything else should compile with the stable
version. Evaluating an environment variable that is adjusted on a regular
basis will break most of my code.

Anyway, I can change that if there's demand.



Ullrich von Bassewitz                        
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
Received on Wed Oct 24 23:14:50 2012

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2012-10-24 23:14:54 CEST