Message-ID:	<002901c20392$d9b3c120$0102a8c0@acceleron>
From:	"Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
To:	<djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
References:	<10205241453 DOT AA19974 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
Subject:	Re: refresh++
Date:	Sat, 25 May 2002 12:20:24 +1000
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

> > > No plans to try any binary updates.  Is that what everyone remembered?
> >
> > Sounds okay, but until the LIBC code is patched to build with GCC 3.1
you
> > may want to add a readme specific for GCC 3.1 that says something like:-
> >     The current LIBC needs to have a number of funtion calls changed due
to
> > stricter checking and some type changes that are included in GCC 3.1
>
> There are no plans to make a 2.03 libc source compilable with GCC 3.x;
> that's a CVS/2.04 feature.
>
> Last time I checked (3.0something) you could build 2.03, but you had to
> edit some of the supporting input scripts to turn off warnings to errors
> and a few other things

Sounds okay, but is it documented anywhere in the refresh?

So far the files that are needed to be modified by adding a type cast for
one or more function parameters, the files are:-
src\libc\ansi\stdio\fprintf.c
src\libc\ansi\stdio\fscanf.c
src\libc\ansi\stdio\printf.c
src\libc\ansi\stdio\remove.c
src\libc\compat\ioctl\ioctl.c
src\libc\compat\stdio\vscanf.c
src\libc\compat\stdio\vsscanf.c
src\libc\compat\time\select.c
src\libc\compat\unistd\_irdlink.c
src\libc\compat\unistd\fchown.c
src\libc\compat\unistd\llseek.c
src\libc\dos\io\_close.c
src\libc\dos\io\_creat_n.c
src\libc\dos\io\_open.c
src\libc\dos\io\_read.c
src\libc\dos\io\_write.c
src\libc\posix\fcntl\fcntl.c
src\libc\posix\sys\stat\fstat.c
src\libc\posix\sys\stat\lstat.c
src\libc\posix\unistd\link.c
src\libc\posix\unistd\lseek.c
src\libc\posix\unistd\write.c
src\libc\posix\unistd\confstr.c

Please note that confstr.c as simple as I thought and I am wtill working on
it as the compiler does not like the following line in the file:-
      out_len = snprintf(buf, len, "");
GCC 3.1 complains about the third parameter.

I seemed to have screwed something up in upgrading to GCC 3.1 and/or trying
to do a complete rebuild with GCC 3.1. I am getting SIGSEGV failures on a
number of exes that I have build. If I can't find the reason in the next 4
or 5 hours I will post more details on this.

- Raw text -