Re: string.h vs string.h usage

[Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd at yahoo dot com>]

Pavel Tsekov wrote:
> 
> Any opinions on this topic ?
> 
> >
> > > Btw one thing - I've found many #include <strings.h> in
> > > the latest sources - shouldn't this be changed to #include
> > > <string.h> ? mingw doesnt have strings.h. Btw It seems that
> > > if you have string.h you dont need strings.h (I'm under
> > > the impression that string.h include strings.h on linux)
> > >
> > > Does this sound reasonable ?
> >

Right, MinGW provides string.h not strings.h because MS doesn't provide
strings.h.

> > I dunno. Setup builds with -mno-cygwin with FAIK uses all mingw headers,
> > so I don't know whether that is needed or not. Thats probably better
> > asked on-list :}.
> >
> 

Setup, strace, possibly more build with the -mno-cygwin switch picking
up the MinGW headers.

> Yes but it gives various include paths from cygwin build and newlib
> build -
> this means that you compile only in this environment (i.e. winsup env).
> If you
> try only mingw it wont work :)
> 
> However I've fixed that for me locally

There should be nothing to fix.  If there is then you've done something
wrong in the setup or building the program.  Using -mno-cygwin should
only give you MinGW headers and never the Cygwin headers.  The only way
I can think of that this would happen is if you also added a
-I/usr/include to the gcc build options or if you modified the gcc
source and rebuilt it yourself.

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com