From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Apr 5 23:22: 2 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF9815596 for ; Mon, 5 Apr 1999 23:21:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.2/8.9.2) id XAA46619; Mon, 5 Apr 1999 23:20:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 23:20:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904060620.XAA46619@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Bruce Evans Subject: Re: ports/10965: lcc-3.6 unable to compile anything Reply-To: Bruce Evans Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR ports/10965; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Bruce Evans To: jef53313@bayou.uh.edu, jkoshy@FreeBSD.org Cc: bde@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/10965: lcc-3.6 unable to compile anything Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 16:12:10 +1000 >jeff> hello.c: /usr/include/machine/ansi.h:106: invalid use of `long' >jeff> hello.c: /usr/include/machine/ansi.h:107: invalid use of `long' > >Has the use of 'long long' made it to any standard? We >probably need to guard the use of 'long long' otherwise. It is in the draft C9x standard, unfortunately. I expect this to take about twice as long as the C standard to become widely used (20 years instead of only 10 ;-). I hack out the long longs in to test compiling things with non-gcc compilers, but this breaks the definitions int64_t and u_int64_t. Nothing that uses these definitions can possibly work with tcc. E.g., stdio can't be compiled, and some hacks would have to be restored for to even be includable. I had hoped that the __attribute__(()) stuff would help hide this problem. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message