Message-ID: <002901c20392$d9b3c120$0102a8c0@acceleron> From: "Andrew Cottrell" To: References: <10205241453 DOT AA19974 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> Subject: Re: refresh++ Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 12:20:24 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com > > > 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 Sounds okay, but is it documented anywhere in the refresh? So far the files that are needed to be modified by adding a type cast for one or more function parameters, the files are:- src\libc\ansi\stdio\fprintf.c src\libc\ansi\stdio\fscanf.c src\libc\ansi\stdio\printf.c src\libc\ansi\stdio\remove.c src\libc\compat\ioctl\ioctl.c src\libc\compat\stdio\vscanf.c src\libc\compat\stdio\vsscanf.c src\libc\compat\time\select.c src\libc\compat\unistd\_irdlink.c src\libc\compat\unistd\fchown.c src\libc\compat\unistd\llseek.c src\libc\dos\io\_close.c src\libc\dos\io\_creat_n.c src\libc\dos\io\_open.c src\libc\dos\io\_read.c src\libc\dos\io\_write.c src\libc\posix\fcntl\fcntl.c src\libc\posix\sys\stat\fstat.c src\libc\posix\sys\stat\lstat.c src\libc\posix\unistd\link.c src\libc\posix\unistd\lseek.c src\libc\posix\unistd\write.c src\libc\posix\unistd\confstr.c Please note that confstr.c as simple as I thought and I am wtill working on it as the compiler does not like the following line in the file:- out_len = snprintf(buf, len, ""); GCC 3.1 complains about the third parameter. I seemed to have screwed something up in upgrading to GCC 3.1 and/or trying to do a complete rebuild with GCC 3.1. I am getting SIGSEGV failures on a number of exes that I have build. If I can't find the reason in the next 4 or 5 hours I will post more details on this.