Tim Prince wrote:
> Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>
>> While you're at it, if you have a chance, I think a f95 would be helpful
>> as well.
>>
> but some of us may prefer to leave it to the operator to create an alias
> or symlink, which otherwise will increase the number of conflicts which
> arise when we use cygwin as a development environment with other compilers.
ABCD wrote:
> Eric Blake wrote:
>> According to Yaakov (Cygwin/X) on 3/17/2009 10:52 PM:
>>> Actually, SUSv2 requires a cc and c89; SUSv3 mentions only a c99.
>> So it would be nice to have all three names. And perhaps c89 (but not the
>> others) should imply --std=gnu89.
>>
>
> Just as a point of reference, Gentoo Linux provides c89 and c99 as shell
> scripts, which contain the following:
Perhaps the nice thing to would be supply an auxiliary (optional) package
full of alternative-name helper shell scripts like these. (Apropos of
nothing, I'll point out that SUS may demand cc, c89 and/or c99, but says
nothing about cc-3, c89-3, c99-4, or any other such combination.... so it
might be enough to just ship scripts and let them point to whatever the
default selected by alternatives is?)
cheers,
DaveK
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
