Michael Deutschmann wrote:
coreutils-6.3 includes a patch, c99-to-c89.diff, to allow it to be
compiled on platforms that don't support declarations after statements.
However, this patch is not sufficent -- I had to fix two other areas to
get coreutils to compile under GCC 2.95.3.
I've appended my fixes. They are to be applied after the existing
c99-to-c89.diff.
[snip patch]
Thanks for those.
FYI:
Since I remember having a discussion on the wisdom of requiring c99,
I'll mention that I have since discovered that our sparc Solaris
platform (which is 2.7, that being the oldest version on which we still
support products) does not have a c99. In fact, other than gcc 3.2.3
which we have built for 2.8 (and doesn't work on 2.7, if at all -
configure complained 'header exists but is not usable' for apparently
EVERY header that existed), I can't find that we have *any* c99 compiler
for sparc.
So, at least here, if c99 becomes a strict requirement, I won't be able
to build on sparc Solaris at all, unless I can manage building gcc first.
--
Matthew
"I don't question your existence -- God" (seen on a church billboard)
_______________________________________________
Bug-coreutils mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
