Possible bug in egcs-1.1b?

[Alex Buell]

On Sun, 27 Sep 1998, Mumit Khan wrote:

> Works fine on a RedHat 5.0 machine with glibc-devel-2.0.7-7. It would be
> much more useful if you would present pre-processed source file (see
> the -save-temps option) so that others will not have to depend on
> guesswork regarding the various glibc version specific headers.

There was a significant change in 2.0.96(not sure if it existed in prior
versions) that means that you have to define _GNU_SOURCE yourself so that
the getopt.h include file will define the struct option for getopt_long().
I'm sure that older getopts.h (I have the relevant includes from 2.0.4)
includes does not have an #ifdef _GNU_SOURCE around the option struct
definition.

I'm not sure if this is correct behaviour for glibc-2.0.96 though. I'll
have a word with Drepper. 

Cheers,
Alex
--
 /\_/\  Legalise cannabis now! 
( o.o ) Grow some cannabis today!
 > ^ <  Peace, Love, Unity and Respect to all.

http://www.tahallah.demon.co.uk - *new* - rewritten for text browser users!

Linux tahallah 2.1.122 #43 Sat Sep 19 10:54:36 EDT 1998 libc 2.0.96 One AMD 486 DX/4 processor, 49.77 total bogomips, 32M RAM