Message-ID: <397D5971.A6179054@softhome.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:10:09 +0200
From: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: lt,en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>,
        DJGPP Workers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: GCC headers and DJGPP port
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000725100550 DOT 22846G-100000 AT is>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> I don't think we will get anywhere in this matter.  I have just been
> told (in a private mail) that I've generated too much email already,
> and that, simply put, I should shut up and crawl back into the hole
> from which I emerged.

I'm speechless.

> Anyway, as I see it, we have one more chance to get this done as we
> think it should: we could submit patches to the configury to do what
> we want, i.e. to use system headers at build time and not to install
> GCC's headers (except stdarg.h and varargs.h) at "make install" time.

I'm afraid this kind of patch semantically is too similar to overriding
USER_H (set of headers to be installed), to be considered. IMHO it will
be complete waste of time.

IMHO the most reasonable (I don't say 'the best') solution is to set
defaults for *_t types in GCC sources, what does Mark's patch, and adopt
header sentinels.

Laurynas