Unable to bootstrap gcc snapshot of 20001211 on Dynix/ptx

[Robert Lipe]

Russ Allbery wrote:
> Robert Lipe <robertlipe@usa.net> writes:
> 
> > But isn't a system far more likely to have memmove as described in ISO C
> > library ago than bcopy anyway?  Replacing the calls to bcopy still seems
> > like a better path.
> 
> If there are really systems without memmove and with defective versions of
> bcopy, it's not that hard to reimplement a simple, stupid, and unoptimized
> version of memmove that should work on most systems.  Relies on comparing

Agreed.  But to clarify the problem at hand, this doesn't seem to be one
of those systems.  It has a "broken" bcopy but a functional memcpy.  So
if we eliminate the calls to the (less standard) bcopy and replce them
with calls to the more standardized memcpy, we still win.

RJL