Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 14:34:27 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200007171834.OAA06211@indy.delorie.com>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT delorie DOT com>
To: Mike Stump <mrs AT windriver DOT com>
CC: gcc AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <200007171736.KAA29313@kankakee.wrs.com> (message from Mike Stump
	on Mon, 17 Jul 2000 10:36:53 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: GCC headers and DJGPP port
References:  <200007171736 DOT KAA29313 AT kankakee DOT wrs DOT com>
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

> From: Mike Stump <mrs AT windriver DOT com>
> Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 10:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
> 
> Let it install and use its own headers, remove your headers, and fix
> the port, if any of the bits are wrong.

Sorry, I don't understand how can this ever work reliably.  Some of
the definitions provided by the headers that GCC wants to install are
closely related to the library.  I don't see how can GCC provide
definitions that will never conflict with library internals.  Please
tell what am I missing.

> A sure sign of a non-maintained port, is a system with its own
> vararg.h...

How about a system with its own stddef.h?  Standard types such as
size_t, wchar_t, the definition of NULL -- these are surely closely
related to the internals of a library, right?  And GCC has no means of
knowing how to define these correctly for the library, right?