From: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv To: Laurynas Biveinis , djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:58:27 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: more gcc issues Message-ID: <39216213.26876.882E23@localhost> In-reply-to: <39211E30.DBF7E305@softhome.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) 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 16 May 2000, at 13:08, Laurynas Biveinis wrote: > It seems (still not 100%) that GCC maintainers are willing > to use #include_next in their headers and this will make > our life easier. > > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > So you are in effect saying that the GCC maintainers favor non-free > > software? It doesn't seem right to me; if that is indeed how GCC > > maintainers feel, I'd even go as far as writing to Richard Stallman > > about this problem. > > I don't think that working around bugs in non-free software is favoring it. > This would mean that e.g. Andris does a very bad job with his 2.95.2 port > when he splits bootstrap to work around windows DPMI selector leak. > I'm also don't like it, but I don't want to have to restart make (and to figure out whether some cleanup is needed before restarting). I prefer to start building gcc before I'm leaving for some time and to see results of build (not a message about crash) after I come back Anyway last may build of gcc-2.95.2 in end of March (not uploaded) was done under Linux using cross-compiler. So I got rid of Win9X descriptor leak problems. If there will be release of gcc-2.95.3 I'll perhaps build it this way (not under Win9X) Andris