X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f Message-ID: <3FE5DC05.3090400@phekda.gotadsl.co.uk> Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:44:37 +0000 From: Richard Dawe User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031031 X-Accept-Language: en, de, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: isnanf et al References: <1ee DOT 15fab781 DOT 2d171158 AT aol DOT com> In-Reply-To: <1ee.15fab781.2d171158@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Hello. Kbwms AT aol DOT com wrote: > In a message dated 12/21/2003 9:23:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, > rich AT phekda DOT gotadsl DOT co DOT uk writes: > >> > >> >The fixes would entail modifying the 24 files in libm v204 that were >> >mentioned in the email. My suggestion is to revert to the sources for >> >those files in libm v203. >> >> That would break the build with gcc 3.3.x (and 3.2.x?). Those changes >> were made, so that DJGPP 2.04 could be built with gcc 3.3.x (and 3.2.x?). >> >> I think you posted a patch that #undef various things. Maybe applying >> that patch and revert the gcc fixes in libm would work. > > > > Do you have a simple way to "revert the gcc fixes" or must the job be > done manually? Patches for changes committed to CVS are sent to the djgpp-cvs mailing list automatically ("CVS notifications"). If you have the mail sent to djgpp-cvs, you can reverse the patch using patch. E.g.: patch -R -p -i /path/to/patch.diff I can dig out the appropriate CVS commit mails, if you'd like. > Which files should be used as the base (or from set)? I don't really understand the question. Do you mean which version should you start from? 2.03, 2.04 alpha 1, 2.04 beta 1? Bye, Rich =] -- Richard Dawe [ http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~phekda/richdawe/ ] "You can't evaluate a man by logic alone." -- McCoy, "I, Mudd", Star Trek