Re: question about switch, return, break

From: George (greerga@CIRCLEMUD.ORG)
Date: 12/20/97


On Fri, 19 Dec 1997, Blue Lang wrote:

>both bpls and Rom2.4 failed on crypt(3). i think glibc moved crypt(3) to
>it's own library, while the older C lib had that function in the stock
>libs. i may be wrong about that, though.

It did, but bpl12 (and previous) has a check for -lcrypt if you don't have
crypt in it. (As I said, no warnings, no errors with libc 2.0.5c)

>> >-fno-strict-prototypes was being completely ignored, or am I
>> >misinterpreting what that flag is supposed to do?
>
>yes, but should't it keep same name functions from causing errors by using
>the one defined in the source code, not in the C headers?

Don't know exactly what the flag is supposed to do or resolve conflicts but
the beauty of gcc is you can just download the source and look. :)

--
George Greer  -  Me@Null.net   | Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity
http://www.van.ml.org/~greerga | is not thus handicapped. -- Elbert Hubbard


     +------------------------------------------------------------+
     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     | http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
     +------------------------------------------------------------+



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST