From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 29 00:09:18 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1776C37B401 for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 00:09:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-relay.omnis.com (smtp-relay.omnis.com [216.239.128.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4852A43F85 for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 00:09:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from softweyr.homeunix.net (66-91-236-204.san.rr.com [66.91.236.204]) by smtp-relay.omnis.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 542821C0B6; Thu, 29 May 2003 00:09:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr To: Bruce M Simpson Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 00:09:14 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: <200305280808.43444.wes@softweyr.com> <20030528231134.GE23471@spc.org> In-Reply-To: <20030528231134.GE23471@spc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200305290009.14583.wes@softweyr.com> cc: hackers@freebsd.org cc: Julian Elischer cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Subject: Re: gcc bug? Openoffice port impossibel to compile on 4.8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 07:09:18 -0000 On Wednesday 28 May 2003 04:11 pm, Bruce M Simpson wrote: > I remember having to convert all my Lattice C code to use ANSI style > declarations after upgrading to SAS/C on the Amiga. > > However, we're dealing with something a bit more stable in terms of > code base, anyway. Having to commit a whole bunch of fixes for the > sake of a compiler upgrade isn't acceptable. Sounds like the GCC > guys have been bitten by the Linux bug. That's what it sounds like to me, too. At the same time we're changing the ports infrastructure so we intentionally break all cross-compilers; they have to fix the CFLAGS in order to make the compilers compile. Linux may be leading the charge but we're following right along. I may take the time to produce a snobol port that compiles cleanly; I like having it available for hysterical raisins. It does irk me that we can't compile valid K&R code without the compiler throwing a conniption fit trying to typecheck something it has no real knowledge of. -- Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket? Wes Peters wes@softweyr.com