www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f |
X-Recipient: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
X-Spam-Checker-Version: | SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org |
X-Spam-Level: | |
X-Spam-Status: | No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,RP_MATCHES_RCVD |
autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 | |
Date: | Tue, 01 Aug 2017 22:10:04 +0300 |
Message-Id: | <83o9rzyuib.fsf@gnu.org> |
From: | "Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com> |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
In-reply-to: | <5980C3AA.2080305@gmx.de> (djgpp@delorie.com) |
Subject: | Re: ANNOUNCE: DJGPP port of GNU binutils 2.29 uploaded. |
References: | <201707301540 DOT v6UFecLb017840 AT delorie DOT com> <CAA2C=vBWY7HYeu+tdO=WYN=wEmWfhLXWgH-9PtSvZkMs54rs1Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <5980C3AA DOT 2080305 AT gmx DOT de> |
X-detected-operating-system: | by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] |
X-Received-From: | 2001:4830:134:3::e |
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2017 20:08:42 +0200 > From: "Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com> > > Am 01.08.2017 11:06, schrieb Ozkan Sezer (sezeroz AT gmail DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]: > > On 7/30/17, Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via > > djgpp-announce AT delorie DOT com]<djgpp-announce AT delorie DOT com> wrote: > >> This is a port of GNU binutils 2.29 to MSDOS/DJGPP. > > > > The bfd _doprnt patch needs submitting to binutils, if you haven't done > > so already. > > No, because I do not think that this shall be fixed in binutils. IMO this is > a DJGPP bug. I do not know who has decide decades ago to declare _doprnt in > stdio.h but now this declaration collides with the one from libiberty. Isn't it true that symbols that begin with an underscore are "reserved for the implementation", i.e. for the C library? Or am I misremembering the C Standard? If I'm right, then libiberty has no business declaring functions with such names. > An inspection of my linux system and my cygwin installation shows > that there is nothing like _doprnt in their stdio.h. That doesn't mean anything: different implementations of the C library have different internals. _doprnt is not a standard function, so looking for it in other implementations or n some relevant standards is not recommended.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |