RE: [PATCH] -std-c89 not supported

> From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:justin@erenkrantz.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 9:23 AM

> --On Wednesday, June 18, 2003 5:16 PM +1000 leif.eriksen@hpa.com.au wrote:
>
> > Ah, so I'm confused now.
> >
> > 1. You said Sander was having an issue with Solaris, which made me think
> > this was added to help him, but you say no.
>
> No, he needed to remove it to compile. =) (Darn, Sander isn't awake yet. I
> hope I'm remembering correctly. Apologies if I'm not.)

You are correct Justin. -std=c89 is a no go on Solaris.
 
> > 2. When you say this whole thing should be yanked, do you mean the patch or
> > the directive to the compiler ?
>
> I meant that -std=c89 shouldn't be passed to the compiler ever as APR
> explicitly relies upon some semantics that may render the OS's includes
> non-C89 compliant. Therefore, it isn't a check that we should turn on even in
> maintainer mode. -- justin

I agree. I'll yank this somewhere today if noone beats me to it.

Sander

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jun 18 13:37:29 2003