Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 18:46:10 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
Subject: Re: more gcc issues
In-Reply-To: <391FFE43.B259DA2C@softhome.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000515184515.12234G-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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
Precedence: bulk


On Mon, 15 May 2000, Laurynas Biveinis wrote:

> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > GCC's limits.h does call the system's limits.h so this isn't a problem.
> > 
> > How does it pull that trick?
> 
> #include_next

Right, I forgot about that.  Thanks.

This still leaves a possible problem of a conflict between what GCC's 
header says before #include_next and what our header says.