Re: Convert 3.2 sources to ISO C90

[Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>]

law@redhat.com wrote:
> 
> In message <20020605.225401.85393578.davem@redhat.com>, "David S. Miller" write
> s:
>  >    From: law@redhat.com
>  >    Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 23:58:11 -0600
>  >
>  >    However, we still have the problem of how do we bootstrap on new versions
>  >    of hpux -- they're notorious for changing more than just the header files
>  > .
>  >    We could easily end up in a situation where the binaries we have simply
>  >    aren't suitable for new versions of hpux, at which point were're rather
>  >    hosed.
>  >
>  > Then they will have to wait until HP provides binaries of GCC-3.X
>  > whichever is the one that supports that new version of HPUX first.
> No, what it really means is that some poor GCC developer gets stuck doing
> this stuff.  HP certainly isn't going to do it.  So what it really means
> is that *I* get stuck doing this crap.

But getting back to ISO conversion, HP does have an ISO compiler - it just
costs money.  Cygnus used to be able to get copies for free because
of contracts - is this no longer the case for Red Hat?  I bet there are
HP people who would be glad to donate acc copies if it meant that GCC
didn't have to be K&R code any longer; how about it all you HPers reading
this list?

It also occurs to me that if volunteers refuse to port to new
versions of HP/UX until HP coughs up an ISO compiler, HP might get
some motivation all of a sudden.  And if they don't, well, who
really wants to go to that much trouble for some random proprietary
OS anyhow?

Stan