This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Fixincludes


On May 28, 2012, at 7:25 PM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:

> The "upstream packages" might be a third-party OS vendor who supply
> their own compiler and have no interest in supporting GCC. Even if the
> OS system headers get changed, that doesn't help users who have the
> unchanged version (e.g. someone wanting to build GCC on SOlaris 9
> isn't helped by a change in Solaris 11).  New OS releases frequently
> include changes that need to be worked around (e.g. FreeBSD recently
> started using C++11 attributes in their system headers, which GCC
> doesn't support yet.)

OK, thanks for this reply. For a situation when the only available
headers are the sanitized Linux headers and those from recent glibc
(or some other modern libc) am I correct in assuming that this script
is unnecessary and could, conceivably alter something that shouldn't
be altered?

Thanks,

JH


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]