Re: compiler standards (and/or min gcc version) supported with installedheaders ?

[Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot com>]

On 01/03/2013 09:49 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 01/03/2013 11:59 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Jan 2013, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> >
> > > > right now, I would only mention GCC as supported compiler - and add
> > > > others only if somebody steps up that is using that compiler and will
> > > > take care of the support on glibc. nevertheless, I would be
> > > > conservate and handle GCC extensions as extensions - something we
> > > > need to test for before using it.
> > >
> > > Well in that case then the GLIBC_HAVE_BUILTIN_MEMSET is *assumed*
> > > since we support only GCC, and versions 2.91 or newer always
> > > have that builtin, so the code can be cleaned up?
> > >
> > > Did I understand that correctly?
> >
> > No.  The point is that there should be feature tests before extensions are
> > used in installed headers.  I'd say 2.95 as minimum compiler should mean
> > that pre-2.95 GCC generally gets the non-GCC code if it doesn't have the
> > relevant feature (rather than having special handling to use some other
> > feature it might have that can substitute for the feature in newer GCC).
>
> The clarifies it for me thanks.
>
> Users can continue to use pre-2.95 GCC, but will get generic code.

Carlos, could you review my latest revision of the text whether it's 
clear now?

Thanks,
Andreas
--
 Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
  SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg)
    GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126