Date:	Wed, 11 Jul 2001 19:16:52 +0300
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
Message-Id:	<1659-Wed11Jul2001191651+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC:	lauras AT softhome DOT net, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<Pine.A41.4.05.10107110920410.60042-100000@ieva06.lanet.lv>
	(message from Andris Pavenis on Wed, 11 Jul 2001 09:23:43 +0300 (WET))
Subject:	Re: Comments on GCC 3.0 distribution
References:	<Pine DOT A41 DOT 4 DOT 05 DOT 10107110920410 DOT 60042-100000 AT ieva06 DOT lanet DOT lv>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 09:23:43 +0300 (WET)
> From: Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
> 
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> > > From: "Laurynas Biveinis" <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
> > > Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 18:12:53 +0200
> > > 
> > > Does our limits.h have non-standard symbols, so that's the problem?
> > 
> > Yes, we have lots of Posix _POSIX_* constants, and quite a few others.
> > I'm afraid that without out limits.h being included by the one which
> > comes with GCC, some programs which need those constants might not
> > compile.
> 
> I previously have run into trouble when DJGPP limits.h were not included.
> So I have verified this time it's OK (gcc option -M can be used for
> that). 

Yes, there's another include_next is syslimits.h which I previously
missed.  Sorry, and thanks for the tip.

- Raw text -