I still prefer just requiring gcc-3 (although it currently works "fine" with 2.95 as well) (except on some 64-bit targets).
Agreed. Though it does not hurt to start looking into portability early especially as Paflof is close to complete now.
"close to complete"?!? muahahahahaha! only 7.3 ("Forth language command group") is anywhere near complete yet.
Please keep types.h intact, and have it include an auto-types.h or something like that. Much easier if you want to bypass the automatic stuff for whatever reason.
It's enough to touch types.h before doing a "make". Another idea would be to give a parameter to conf.pl to create a default config. keeping 2 instances of the same file seems a bit unclean.
touching is not good enough, certainly not when you use CVS. oh, and my system clock tends to reset itself to 1904.
+CC = gcc
I removed this for a reason ;) Just CC=gcc make if you need it...
+NM = nm -t bsd
Not all nm's are GNU nm. Different nm's outputs are similar enough to be parseable with a simple regexp.
there's 3 output formats with gnu nm - sysv, posix and bsd. To be clean we have to check which output format is available and use an according regexp for that (hoping that other systems use one of these output formats) For now this should be ok, because, as you said, we're still GNU cc specific in many other positions.
+$CC="gcc -std=gnu9x"; +$NM="nm";
Better just use sh's already-set variables for this.
this forbids using conf.pl on the command line, as they're set by make, not sh.
I think that's the lesser of two evils...
The C compiler already defines __STDC_VERSION__ to 199901L or greater if C99 features are supported.
I know. I just thought of a theoretical compiler that knows about restrict without supporting other C99 features. It seemed wiser to check for the used features themselfes, not the standards that say "this feature belongs here"
true
Uh.. nulling out reserved words...
not. they'll only be nulled out when compiling with a non-C99 compiler, and it's not a reserved word then :)
Better than C++ style comments in pure C code ;) And it's the only way
C99 comments, not C++ comments. _of course_ anything C++ is much more evil than #if 0 ;)
of doing it "portable" ;) But as John already mentioned, we should decide whether we want that code or not and drop it completely in the later case.
Well if the signal handler would actually work on _all_ linux systems, i'd get rid of the code, but i think i'll have to change it back now.
anyway, this (and most other "more evil" parts of paflof) is just in the "paflof runs as client on a unix host" version of the code (which is the only one in existance right now, of course).
cheers,
Segher
- To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@freiburg.linux.de with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message http://www.freiburg.linux.de/OpenBIOS/ - free your system..