X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Message-ID:	<3FE5DC05.3090400@phekda.gotadsl.co.uk>
Date:	Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:44:37 +0000
From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT gotadsl DOT co DOT uk>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031031
X-Accept-Language:	en, de, fr
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: isnanf et al
References:	<1ee DOT 15fab781 DOT 2d171158 AT aol DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<1ee.15fab781.2d171158@aol.com>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Kbwms AT aol DOT com wrote:
> In a message dated 12/21/2003 9:23:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> rich AT phekda DOT gotadsl DOT co DOT uk writes:
> 
>> >
>> >The fixes would entail modifying the 24 files in libm v204 that were
>> >mentioned in the email.  My suggestion is to revert to the sources for
>> >those files in libm v203.
>>
>> That would break the build with gcc 3.3.x (and 3.2.x?). Those changes
>> were made, so that DJGPP 2.04 could be built with gcc 3.3.x (and 3.2.x?).
>>
>> I think you posted a patch that #undef various things. Maybe applying
>> that patch and revert the gcc fixes in libm would work.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a simple way to "revert the gcc fixes" or must the job be 
> done manually?

Patches for changes committed to CVS are sent to the djgpp-cvs mailing 
list automatically ("CVS notifications"). If you have the mail sent to 
djgpp-cvs, you can reverse the patch using patch. E.g.:

     patch -R -p<number> -i /path/to/patch.diff

I can dig out the appropriate CVS commit mails, if you'd like.

> Which files should be used as the base (or from set)?

I don't really understand the question. Do you mean which version should 
you start from? 2.03, 2.04 alpha 1, 2.04 beta 1?

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~phekda/richdawe/ ]

"You can't evaluate a man by logic alone."
   -- McCoy, "I, Mudd", Star Trek

- Raw text -