X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 21:54:13 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu
Message-Id: <6726-Thu07Feb2002215412+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.2.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, ST001906 AT HRZ1 DOT HRZ DOT TU-Darmstadt DOT De
In-reply-to: <10202071516.AA29586@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu)
Subject: Re: conflicting types for bzero (gcc303)
References:  <10202071516 DOT AA29586 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
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: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
> Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 09:16:49 -0600 (CST)
> > 
> > If there is such a program, it is already broken by GCC 3.x, since
> > the inline code emitted by GCC for bzero and bcopy behaves like GCC's
> > own internal prototype says: it doesn't return anything.
> 
> There are lots of programs broken by GCC 3.x - and a lot of people 
> are continuing to use GCC 2.x versions because of it.  Just because
> GCC 3.x has done it, we shouldn't force people to change programs
> after installing a refresh (it's supposed to fix bugs, not break anything).

I thought we were talking about a change conditioned on GCC's
version being 3.x or more.  I agree that previous versions should
remain unaffected, as much as possible.