Message-Id: <200008111728.NAA06831@delorie.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 20:31:31 +0200 To: news AT jgreen4 DOT fsnet DOT co DOT uk X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.2.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5b From: "Eli Zaretskii" CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: (message from Jason Green on Fri, 11 Aug 2000 00:25:17 +0100) Subject: Re: DJGPP neither running on ms-dos 6.2 nor on caldera-dos 7.03 References: <8mq6n6$6gu8v$1 AT ID-16903 DOT news DOT cis DOT dfn DOT de> <39912C43 DOT DF0BB5FD AT maths DOT unine DOT ch> <200008091553 DOT LAA13441 AT delorie DOT com> Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > From: Jason Green > Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp > Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 00:25:17 +0100 > > Most of these FAQs probably stem from #include , which has > streambuf.h nested in it. This is only one of the problems. Take a look at lang/cxx and lang/cxx/std: there are a lot of files there whose names exceed the DOS 8+3 limits. > How about making a copy of streambuf.h with > an 8.3 filename and editing the nested include within iostream.h? You suggest a manual solution. This is error prone (what if someone who ports GCC forgets to do that?), and it doesn't solve the case when a new header is introduced with a new release of GCC that wasn't known before. > This could reduce the FAQs even though it does not actually fix the > problem. And if you catch the GNU maintainers in the right mood, who > knows... ;-) We have been unable to catch the GCC maintainers ``in the right mood'' to solve even simpler and more annoying problems. Anyway, thanks for the suggestions.