RE: rebasing new packages?!

["Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Tishler [mailto:jason@tishler.net] 
> Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 3:34 AM
> To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
> Subject: Re: rebasing new packages?!
> 
> 
> Rob,
> 
> On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 11:55:31PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> > b) is an alternative approach to what I've already 
> documented here. So 
> > it covers libstc++ aka libg++-3. I don't know how much of 
> the STL that 
> > includes (see my earlier email).

> 
> Can we remove the "-Werror" option and start using STL in setup.exe?

IF there are warnings, they should be cleaned up. The Werror option
stays unless there is a compelling reason not to use it. At -O2 inlines
are only done on code within the class declaration and code marked as
inlinable, so this particular warning should be resolvable. Looking at
it, they are trying to inline a recursive function call.... I don't know
if that is or isn't an issue for newer gcc's, but it sure sounds like
our one doesn't like it. 

There are 3 instances of that function call in the g++-3 directory, one
from within it, and two from the template right below it's definition.

Perhaps removing the explicit inline from the definition is appropriate?
(-O3 will automatically inline it, and probably get that warning again,
but casual users would be safe.

Or perhaps it's resolved in newer g++-3 versions, and we can update?

Rob