From: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 12:14:01 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: more gcc issues
Message-ID: <391D4709.24006.260204@localhost>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello folks,
In researching the solution to redefinition warnings when compiling gcc 2.96, 
I found that the gcc folks have a strong desire (to put it nicely) for ports 
to the headers provided by gcc instead of the one provided by libc. Here's a 
quote from the message (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/1999-09n/msg00738.html)
> ...
> Bottom line, with version 2.96 and later, you absolutely must use the
> builtins.  Which means to me that you should just use gcc's stdarg.h
> always.
 
And quoting from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/1999-09n/msg00827.html :
>   > > There are no GCC headers in my base system.  We've never needed them,
>   and > > there are copyright issues anyway. > > Do you have your own stdarg.h
>   too?
> They may have their own stdarg.h, but we should not be using it.  We should be
> using the gcc supplied stdarg.h & varargs.h.  This is related to the who
> thread about how a port should never, ever override USER_H.
> 

...
 
> That will also root out problems with stddef.h since ports like FreeBSD,
> OpenBSD and NetBSD will start using the one provided by gcc instead of their
> own.  

And to cap it off, here's this nugget from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/1999-
09n/msg00596.html :
> 
> When doing varargs/stdargs we absolutely do not want to be using system
> definitions.  Even if the system compiler is gcc.

You can read in amazement the whole thread at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/1999-
09n/threads.html#00907