On 15 April 2014 12:45, Douglas B Rupp wrote: > No I considered that but I think that number will be very small. Will you > concede, in hindsight, that it would be better had the name been chosen to > be more unique?
No argument from me there, but the same applies to VxWorks, who have now chosen the same not-very-distinctive name, but it's even worse in their case as that name has been in use by GCC for many years. This seems rather foolish of VxWorks, but knowing that doesn't solve anything. Could we install the file as unwind-gcc.h and conditionally install another file called unwind.h with the content below if a configure test including <unwind.h> fails: #warning "This header file is deprecated, use unwind-gcc.h instead" #include_next "unwind-gcc.h"
