Sender:	rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID:	<3CF0ADEE.EC21136F@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date:	Sun, 26 May 2002 10:42:06 +0100
From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language:	de,fr
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: refresh++
References:	<200205251323 DOT PAA07405 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se> <002701c2047b$d47437f0$0102a8c0 AT acceleron>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Andrew Cottrell wrote:
> 
> Martin,
> > What is this crap? Surely an empty format string is allowed and ok. I
> > suggest you find if there's a specific warning that can be switched
> > off and do that.
> 
> 1) No it is not crap and I take offence at your comment.

I think Martin may be talking about what gcc is doing, rather than what you
are saying.

[snip]
> By the way have you tried to rebuild the LIBC with GCC 3.1? If not could you
> give it a go and let me know what you find as this would be very helpfull
> and will allow me to asertain if I have totally screwed up my system or
> there is some other issue lurking in the background that I have not found
> yet.

I remember we discussed some of these issues a while ago on djgpp-workers
(_doprnt() arguments, etc.). These problems have definitely come up before. I
don't think your system is screwed up.

I'm resyncing my mirror of the DJGPP archive right now. I'll try to rebuild
the libc sources with gcc 3.1 later this afternoon (GMT+1). I'll let you know
what I find.

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]

- Raw text -