Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2000/05/13/16:58:27
> From: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
> Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 12:14:01 -0400
>
> In researching the solution to redefinition warnings when compiling
> gcc 2.96, I found that the gcc folks have a strong desire (to put it
> nicely) for ports to the headers provided by gcc instead of the one
> provided by libc.
I don't like that attitude, but the question is: what does that mean
in practical terms? Do GCC-supplied headers contradict ours to the
degree that it's impractical to make them compatible? If so, we
should fight that attitude.
Last time I built GCC from scratch (which was a very long time ago),
the GCC-supplied headers were only required for building stage1 of the
compiler. After that, you used the stage-1 binary in conjunction with
your normal system headers. Did that change?
Could you, or someone else, post a summary of the current situation
and related problems, as far as DJGPP is concerned?
- Raw text -