From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id: <10205241453.AA19974@clio.rice.edu>
Subject: Re: refresh++
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 09:53:31 -0500 (CDT)
In-Reply-To: <002c01c202f4$1cdf0990$0102a8c0@acceleron> from "Andrew Cottrell" at May 24, 2002 05:24:22 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> > Plans are to refresh with the following files:
> >
> > readme.1st         win2k/xp doc updates
> > djdev203.(ver,dsm) update version and misc dsm fixes
> > djgpp.env          env variable updates
> > string.h           gcc 3.x fix
> > djtypes.h          gcc 3.x fix
> >
> > No plans to try any binary updates.  Is that what everyone remembered?
> 
> Sounds okay, but until the LIBC code is patched to build with GCC 3.1 you
> may want to add a readme specific for GCC 3.1 that says something like:-
>     The current LIBC needs to have a number of funtion calls changed due to
> stricter checking and some type changes that are included in GCC 3.1

There are no plans to make a 2.03 libc source compilable with GCC 3.x;
that's a CVS/2.04 feature.  

Last time I checked (3.0something) you could build 2.03, but you had to
edit some of the supporting input scripts to turn off warnings to errors
and a few other things