Re: [Patch] Fix ac_c99_complex configury

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>]

Paolo Carlini <pcarlini@suse.de> writes:

| Paolo Carlini wrote:
| 
| >Before deciding unilaterally to do something different and
| >not regulated by the standard I'm asking that we explore thoroughly the
| >other options.
| >  
| >
| For example, we could give people a choice, at configure/installation
| time, whether installing the backward headers or not.

Does that ease our maintainance burden?  Does that cover the case of
most users?  Most users don't get to install GCC by themselves.
The compiler is just another tool in their toolkit, and most of the
time they don't have the right or are not in position to change the
compiler, which will have been installed by someone not fully aware of
the constraints of the developers.

| This would make
| sense, in my opinion (default: installing the backward headers; in 4.2,
| default: not installing the backward headers)

And what will be the gain here?

-- Gaby