Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 05:06:37 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200007180906.FAA06975@indy.delorie.com>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT delorie DOT com>
To: lauras AT softhome DOT net
CC: bkorb AT sco DOT COM, mrs AT windriver DOT com, gcc AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org,
        djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <39741C04.A67F5876@softhome.net> (message from Laurynas Biveinis
	on Tue, 18 Jul 2000 10:57:40 +0200)
Subject: Re: GCC headers and DJGPP port
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

> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 10:57:40 +0200
> From: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
> 
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > The problem is that we (the DJGPP maintainers) don't understand why
> > should the headers need to be ``fixed''.  As far as we know, they are
> > just fine.
> 
> This raises one more sensitive issue - remember 'minimizing the FAQs'?
> Our <stdio.h> uses va_list, at least this will be changed by fixincludes.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying: what would fixincludes
do with va_list in stdio.h?  And why would that be a Good Thing (tm)?