Re: Maintenance patch for protoize

[Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>]

  In message <14274.55228.623157.5997@saturn.hollstein.net>you write:
  > On Tue, 24 August 1999, 00:14:01, law@cygnus.com wrote:
  > 
  >  [patch for protoize deleted]
  >  > 
  >  > Are people still using protoize/unprotoize?  Do they really belong in gc
  > c, or
  >  > should they be separate?  I guess I'm wondering about what we gain by ke
  > eping
  >  > this stuff around in the first place.
  > 
  > I used to build protoize/unprotoize all the time while I was working at
  > Alcatel; the programs helped me a lot in migrating lots of K&R code to
  > ANSI-C.  But, this was sometimes in 1994...  I didn't use it since.
OK.  This is about what I was expecting.

  > Might actually be a good idea to create a separate package. If nobody
  > objects (and I'll find some time ;-), I'll create a patch.
I suspect that's the case.  It's not a high priority item, but it does allow us
clean things up some, which is a good thing.

The only worry I'd have is protoize/unprotoize's desire to know where the
gcc include files live.  Though that may (or may not) be historical.

jeffv