From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KmzBO-0003fN-LZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:08:06 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KmzBN-0003dJ-J8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:08:05 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54326 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KmzBN-0003cv-BB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:08:05 -0400
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]:45389)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>) id 1KmzBL-0004lC-A3
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:08:03 -0400
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch 1/2] machine struct - use C99 initializers
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 00:07:58 +0100
References: <48EA0E22.4080302@sgi.com> <48EA28DC.40604@sgi.com>
	<DD005F45-C3A4-4D89-818A-3FDDFDC29AE1@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <DD005F45-C3A4-4D89-818A-3FDDFDC29AE1@web.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200810070007.59487.paul@codesourcery.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?q?F=E4rber?= <andreas.faerber@web.de>, Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>

> > GCC is sufficiently C99 compliant to handle this style of
> > initializers.
> > Maybe it's not C99 compliant enough for other stuff, but on this front
> > it does just fine.
>
> You're missing the point: GCC today is not necessarily GCC 4.3+ or
> whatever has just been released these days and included in your
> favorite Linux distro. Just like Sun continues to ship GCC 3.4.3 on
> their latest OpenSolaris builds, the BeOS world and therefore its
> successor(s) are stuck with GCC 2.95.3 due to C++ ABI breakage in
> between major GCC versions. GCC 2 was originally released in '98 iirc
> and hence not C99 compliant. I'd expect your IRIX to face a similar
> issue, at EOL.

If a host system hasn't bothered upgrading their toolchain in 10 years then I 
refuse to care. If you really want to run and ancient obsolete OS you should 
expect to run equally ancient software.

Paul