need_the_occasional_chunk_of_libio=yes

[Phil Edwards]

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 03:54:53PM -0700, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> 
> 1) eventually, when libstdc++/glibc have a merged libio, libstdc++ won't 
> have to build libio. Thus, the checks for glibc
> 
> AT the moment, it's not merged exactly so all platforms build libio
> HOwever, the machinery to select this should be preserved.

Cool.  That part made sense already, but I wasn't quite certain /why/
we were forcing the non-glibc branch.


> > I'm usually in that last branch, where glibc/libio isn't installed at all, so
> > we need to build most of it.  Shouldn't need_xtra_libio be yes in that case?
> 
> yes

I will fix this, but won't check anything in until the current patch queue
is cleared up.


> > For that matter, what's the distinction between the files in 'libio' and
> > the ones in 'xtra_libio'?  I'd be glad to rework it to bring it closer
> > to reality.
> 
> right. I guess the  logic should be:
> 
> 1) if you have all of libio already, disable
> 2) if you don't have libio
>   a) if you need wide stuff, enable all
>   b) if you need just narrow stuff, enable only narrow

Is there then no longer a difference between the need_libio files and the
need_xtra_libio files?  If that's the case, I'll merge them so that only
need_libio and need_wlibio remain.


-- 
pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com  |  pme at sources dot redhat dot com
devphil at several other less interesting addresses in various dot domains
The gods do not protect fools.  Fools are protected by more capable fools.