On 4 Jul 2001, at 2:10, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
I'm copying this part. I can't check it here. So when this will have been uploaded (perhaps next week since I'm also trying to solve another issue before uploading anything; probably the next GPC version number greater than today), anyone who has this problem and used a work-around, please try it without the work-around then and tell us if it works.
I'll be happy to do that.
However, in doing a comparison between "gpc.c" and the "gcc.c" of 2.95.3, I notice a number of points of divergence. The GPC ChangeLog implies that "gpc.c" was periodically synchronized with "gcc.c" in the past. I presume that hasn't been done for a while.
But would it make more sense to create "gpc.c" by copying "gcc.c" to "gpc.c" and then applying a patch to "gpc.c"? Would that be less work than either synchronizing periodically or running afoul of the type of problem that started this thread?
I suppose I am asking why the "patching option" is not being used. Again, the Changelog seems to imply that patches were made directly to "gcc.c" before "gpc.c" was split out as a separate program (a _long_ time ago).
-- Dave