Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/1998/01/28/20:38:22
> There were some warnings I got (redefining NULL and so on) which I
> ignored and some others, which I fixed by patching the fixinclude
> script (or better creating a newly fixinc.djgpp) which does the
> fixing of the standard system headers.
Shouldn't we just fix the djgpp includes, rather than letting gcc
"fix" them itself? I've *never* run fixincludes on djgpp's includes.
> To solve this, I will include in the gcc280b.zip archive the fixed
> headers in $DJDIR/lib/gcc-lib/djgpp/2.80/include, so gcc 2.8.0 will
> find them before the standard headers assuming here, that we modify
> djgpp.env in a may, that $DJDIR/include is _NOT_ part of
> $C_INCLUDE_PATH,
If we do this, how will gcc find djgpp's include files? I'm thinking
of, say, <go32.h>
> And to the concrete problem (see above with _G_fpos_t) gcc280b.zip
> (and/or) the C++ libarry will come with a file file
>
> $DJDIR/djgpp/include/_G_config.h
This doesn't make sense. There is no djgpp directory in the djgpp
distribution. If the C++ library comes with it, it should be
$DJDIR/lang/cxx/_G_config.h
> And since we are here, I have now again a quaestion. Because I was now
> able to build libg++ I would do the following. Since there were in the
> past some problems with it, I would include libstdcxx.a in gpp280b.zip
> and would have in lgpp280b.zip only libgxx.a . Are you agree?
Why not just leave it in lgp*b.zip? People are used to downloading it
anyway, and it includes all the other C++ libraries.
> As you could see, I have changed the libgpp.a to libgxx.a. Is this a
> problem in general?
Yes. People expect libgpp.a and the documentation (and faqs) talk
about libgpp.a. The gxx.exe helper in djgpp uses -lgpp. Why change
it? Unix uses libg++.a, so it's not like we're being "more
compatible".
> And BTW: I will configure gcc (or better cpp) to have $DJDIR/include/gxx
> as default directories for C++ headers and not $DJDIR/lang/cxx. If this
> will make trouble, please let me know.
No. Please don't put non-C includes in the C include tree. I don't
want to start getting questions about "hey, why doesn't #include
<gxx/string.h> work for my C program?". Please keep them separate.
> And a last qeustion: Since the gcc port goes now in the final stage
> I would hear your comments what I should upload for the test stage
> of the port. Is it neccessare to upload also the sources or is there
> no interest for it, since they are not the smallest one (about 5.8 MB)?
Legally, you must upload the sources.
- Raw text -