Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 07:51:40 +0200 (IST) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: 2.04 CVS Build plan In-Reply-To: <200211252116.gAPLGXU02124@envy.delorie.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII 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 On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, DJ Delorie wrote: > > How about if we put them in libglibc.a (a new library), make sure > > people recognize linking to it has different license terms (not > > automatically linked), but it would provide c99 support? > > > > Just an idea, but a big build change... > > I don't think that would be appropriate for djgpp. I agree with DJ. Having many useful functions in a separate LGPL'ed library will most probably create a mess whereby user programs use those functions and then fall under the GNU license without any reasonable alternative for the user to avoid that. Assuming the work on math functions is done (by K.B. Williams), and putting the wide character support aside for a while, could someone please prepare a list of what else is missing? Perhaps that list is not too long, in which case we could have a resonably short plan to write those functions/macros.