From: Mike Stump Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 15:19:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007222219.PAA01604@kankakee.wrs.com> To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il Subject: Re: GCC headers and DJGPP port Cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, gcc AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org, martin AT loewis DOT home DOT cs DOT tu-berlin DOT de Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com > Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 05:19:10 -0400 (EDT) > From: Eli Zaretskii > To: mrs AT windriver DOT com > What I am trying to do is help arrive at an acceptable way of solving > the problem, so that those who will actually do the work would avoid > submitting patches which will be rejected. > Is it okay with you to discuss the remaining few headers that are > relevant to C programs, and see which of them need to be installed by > GCC and which can be left out? Sure. But only on the condition you stated above, that there _is_ in fact a problem. > If it's okay with you, I'd like to discuss limits.h (and syslimits.h > that is related to it) first. Why is it necessary for GCC to install > its own version of this header? Wrong question. I'll answer it anyway, because it is best. It is best, because gcc already knows so much about the target system, that it can generate this file. A way of approaching this, would be to explain to me the problem this causes, slowly, so that I can understand the issues, and we can work out a solution to the problems encountered. Also, we cannot solve problems, without being made aware of them. I'm not aware of too many problems that limits.h should cause. They two biggest problems I see is that we have a brittle way of handling sizeof(int) == 2 and sizeof(long)==8, that should be cleaned up and made robust.