Convert 3.2 sources to ISO C90

[law@redhat.com]

In message <3CFE7AA9.553C5298@apple.com>, Stan Shebs writes:
 > law@redhat.com wrote:
 > > 
 > > [...]  In fact we've received bug reports within
 > > the last couple weeks due to folks trying to build on HPs using the bundle
 > d
 > > compiler and running into cases where ANSI-isms have crept into the source
 > s.
 > 
 > I think it's very telling that a) the ISOisms are quietly showing
 > up over and over, and that b) there is only a small group of HP
 > users that ever notice this.
Yes, but do we want to lock them out of being able to build GCC?  That
seems so counter-intuitive as to be silly to me.

And given that the reports came in nearly immediately after GCC 3.1 was
released and multiple times I'm not sure I'd call it a "small group".

I think this would be an amazingly bad thing to do.

 > Is there some reason not to provide GCC binaries for these HP
 > users?  Are these people on new or old machines?  Has anybody
 > talked to HP about hosting the GCC binaries?  Seems like a good
 > PR move to me; I'm sure HP doesn't want to be publicly known as
 > the sole reason for GCC using pre-ISO C, doesn't sound like the
 > sort of company developers would want to support.
HP has tried to host binaries in the past.  A goodly number of the bug reports
we get are because they've always messed it up.    We really don't want to
get into the binary distribution business, particularly on a platform that
is so, err, "fun" as HPs.

jeff