Re: bcopy -> memcpy/memmove transition proposal

["Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu>]

 > From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>
 > 
 >   In message < 199809191817.LAA10496@cygnus.com >you write:
 >   > This is certainly not necessary for using the mem* functions.
 > True, but there's several files from libiberty that gcc is using
 > obstack, getopt, cplus-dem, pexecute, vfprintf, choose-temp, mkstemp,
 > and alloca.  I think Kaveh is argueing that instead of creating another
 > hack that we should bite the bullet and link in libiberty (dealing
 > with the host/build issues along the way).
 > jeff

	Exactly.  Linking with libiberty would address allowing both
styles to be used while also making things a *lot* cleaner.  :-)

		--Kaveh

PS: The stuff Jeff listed above is the tip of the iceberg, there's lots
more cruft in the source that we should instead be getting cleanly from
libiberty.  E.g. implementations of mybcopy, mybzero, mystrerror,
mystrsignal, etc.  Stuff like vfork and xmalloc, xrealloc, etc are
implemented locally in dozens of places.  Etc, etc.  Its really a big
win to use libiberty. 

--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			Engagement Manager / Project Services
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu		Icon CMT Corp.