Latest snapshot won't build with --enable-libstdcxx-v3

[Marc Espie]

In article < 200009201541.e8KFfr711897@mururoa.inria.fr > you write:
>
>jbuck@racerx.synopsys.com said:
>> I wasn't the person who decided to put in -Werror, but I think it is a
>> very good idea for libstdc++ to use it.
>
>> Warnings produced by the inclusion of system library header files are
>> not acceptable, because it means that no user of the library can use
>> flags like -Wall without being distracted by warnings from the system
>> library. (Old-time Cygnoids are sure to remember how I always used to
>> beat them up for this - libg++ used to always generate piles of
>> warnings, I'd send lots of little patches to fix them, and then the
>> next release would put them all back again).

>> Putting in -Werror forces the developers to produce warning-free code.

>I think that everyone agrees that it is a good idea. Unfortunately, 
>it sometimes prevents people (I'm among them) to compile libstc++-v3
>because of bugs in their system include file (which sadly is a not so
>old glibc) which is bad, and for which we do not have any workaround
>currently.

In my opinion, that should only be more incentive to put pressure on the
guys behind that library to fix the problem.  With all software development
I've seen, putting `work-arounds' in software under development is a very
good receipe to make sure bugs are Not fixed in time for the next release,
as they're not seen to be critical...

>From one point of view, glibc is somewhat `special'.

>From another point of view, it should be just another system library on
a random system... first, because there is more to gcc than the glibc
(but this is political).  Second, because having to do gcc development 
in lock-step with glibc is a sure receipe for disaster.  The looser 
coupling, the better (now this is a technical issue).