[www] mention BSD on c++-abi page

Fri Aug 9 06:44:00 GMT 2002

Since some people mentioned that my instructions were also accurate
for BSD systems, I've committed my last version, and added then
changes for BSD.

BSD folks, is the information accurate?

Andreas

P.S. I also removed some trailing whitespace that I noticed.

Index: c++-abi.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-3.2/c++-abi.html,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -p -r1.2 c++-abi.html

--- c++-abi.html	9 Aug 2002 13:41:17 -0000	1.2
+++ c++-abi.html	9 Aug 2002 13:43:45 -0000
@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
 <html>
   <head>
-    <title>A Common C++ ABI for GNU/Linux</title>
+    <title>A Common C++ ABI for GNU/Linux and BSD</title>
   </head>
 
   <body>
-    <h1>A Common C++ ABI for GNU/Linux</h1>
+    <h1>A Common C++ ABI for GNU/Linux and BSD</h1>
 
     <p>
     The main point of the GCC 3.2 release is to have a relatively
@@ -19,19 +19,19 @@
     specific options.</p>
 
     <p> We strongly advise all developers and distributors to follow
-    the guidelines given here for GNU/Linux systems.</p>
+    the guidelines given here for GNU/Linux and BSD systems.</p>
 
    <h2>Configuring GCC</h2>
-    
+
     <p>Configure GCC with this options:</p>
     <pre>
       --enable-__cxa_atexit
     </pre>
-    
-    <p>GCC is configured by default on GNU/Linux systems also with
+
+    <p>GCC is configured by default on GNU/Linux and BSD systems also with
     these two flags, do not change them to any other value:</p>
     <pre>
-      --enable-threads=posix -enable-shared 
+      --enable-threads=posix -enable-shared
     </pre>
     <p>If you do not use these options, your files generated by GCC
     will not be fully ABI compatible.</p>
@@ -55,14 +55,14 @@
    this order:</p>
     <ol>
       <li>New binutils version</li>
-      <li>New glibc version</li>
+      <li>New glibc version (on GNU/Linux systems only)</li>
       <li>GCC 3.2</li>
     </ol>
     <p>Especially, if you update binutils, you should rebuild glibc so
     that glibc can take advantage of some new options of binutils.</p>
 
     <h2>Caveat</h2>
-    
+
     <p>Since GCC now implements a written ABI that is also implemented
     by other compiler vendors, it might be that we encounter different
     interpretations of the ABI by the vendors, bugs in the ABI or bugs

-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj

