Integrated preprocessor patch - revised

[Zack Weinberg]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 09:52:55PM +0200, Philipp Thomas wrote:
> * Zack Weinberg (zack@wolery.cumb.org) [20000911 20:32]:
>
> > Unrelated question: are we ever going to go back to
> > --without-included-gettext default?  If you want to build a profiled
> > cc1 on a platform where gettext is in libc, you get link errors if you
> > don't use --without-included-gettext.
> 
> Yes, we have a similiar problem with static linked binaries. 

Right, profiled cc1 is a special case of static cc1.

> The problem is stuff like this (from intl/dgettext.c):
> 
...
> libc needs __dgettext, so libc's gettext implementation is pulled in,
> clashing with libintl. Now we have two choices:
> 
>  - compile our libintl with _LIBC defined or modify the the sources to also
>    define __dgettext in presence of IN_GCC or something similiar.

I tried this and got different link errors: this time about multiple
definitions of __dgettext or whatever with different sizes.  libc's
copy of the routine was compiled with a different version of the
compiler and different switches, so this isn't much of a surprise.

>  - make --without-included-gettext the default.
> 
> I'd prefer the latter but it has the drawback that our libintl will only be
> built on a fraction of the hosts it's currently being built on, so bugs in
> that area are much less likely to be caught.

We turned --with-included-gettext on by default to flush out these
bugs, but now most (all, hopefully) have been found and fixed.
There's been two changes in the past three months.  I think we could
probably get away with turning it back off again.

zw