From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id:	<10210160628.AA18741@clio.rice.edu>
Subject:	Re: 2.03 vs 3.2
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Wed, 16 Oct 2002 01:28:51 -0500 (CDT)
In-Reply-To:	<29272946195.20021015213637@softhome.net> from "Laurynas Biveinis" at Oct 15, 2002 09:36:37 PM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version:	1.0
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

> Well, I'm sort of done with it. Below is the patch. All of djdev
> builds with -Werror. I'm not going to backport further fixes, as I've
> already spent too much time working on it. Troubles like bzero
> do not concern me much - I'm happy with this patch for my personal use :)

No offense - but I believe there are way too many changes here for a
safe and timely refresh.  There were other changes required to make the
GCC 3.x build work (such as adding volatiles to some asm blocks) which
I didn't see here.  Some of the changes seem to be just to supress 
warnings.  The volume of the changes (and testing necessary to make sure
something new wasn't broken) scares me witless.

I was thinking we might change 5 or 6 build files.  This is a more massive 
set of changes than the u1 fixes for Win2K/XP support plus all known bugs,
and that was a several month beta.

- Raw text -