Nick Burrett nick at sqrt.co.uk
Tue Dec 28 08:34:34 PST 2004

Peter Naulls said:

> My preference is to change as little glibc code as possible, since I
> think this will ultimately save us a great deal of work.  This does mean
> I will likely, at least in the short term, cause massive breakage in
> Norcroft, and probably a load of extra warnings as I undo some of the
> changes John has done to support RISC OS.  In the first instance, my
> priority to update the older glibc files we have, and to have it at
> least compile.

I think this may be a bad move, and where does it end ?  Are we next going
to import glibc's stdio as well ?  I think it would be better to simply
port glibc rather than try to put too much effort into converting UnixLib
into glibc.

More information about the gcc mailing list