Albert Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:51:50PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
So, people building coreutils will have a choice: apply the
c99-c89 patch or install a modern compiler and use that
instead of the vendor-supplied one.
There are two issues with C99, compiler
On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 08:17:37PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
Albert Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:51:50PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
So, people building coreutils will have a choice: apply the
c99-c89 patch or install a modern compiler and use that
instead of
Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do any of you know of platforms for which that would not work?
I.e., for which there is a useful (or better, `essential') compiler
lacking such support?
GCC 2.95.3 is still the C compiler for OpenBSD 3.6 (released
I want to make coreutils/src/*.c depend on c99, at least for
the ability to intermix statements and declarations and to be
able to declare variables in `for' loops.
Do any of you know of platforms for which that would not work?
I.e., for which there is a useful (or better, `essential') compiler
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do any of you know of platforms for which that would not work?
I.e., for which there is a useful (or better, `essential') compiler
lacking such support?
GCC 2.95.3 is still the C compiler for OpenBSD 3.6 (released November
2004), and it doesn't support
