From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20086 invoked by alias); 16 Jul 2009 02:08:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 19817 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jul 2009 02:08:08 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.33.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:08:01 +0000 Received: from zps76.corp.google.com (zps76.corp.google.com [172.25.146.76]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n6G27vci030011 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:07:58 +0100 Received: from pzk39 (pzk39.prod.google.com [10.243.19.167]) by zps76.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n6G27tAn019619 for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:07:55 -0700 Received: by pzk39 with SMTP id 39so3044316pzk.25 for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:07:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.75.14 with SMTP id c14mr13847618wal.50.1247710074893; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:07:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain.google.com (adsl-71-133-8-30.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [71.133.8.30]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l30sm15017399waf.0.2009.07.15.19.07.54 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:07:54 -0700 (PDT) To: Jerry Quinn Cc: "gcc\@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: [gcc-in-cxx] zlib? References: <1247708793.4098.365.camel@cerberus.qb5.org> From: Ian Lance Taylor Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:08:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1247708793.4098.365.camel@cerberus.qb5.org> (Jerry Quinn's message of "Wed\, 15 Jul 2009 21\:46\:33 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-System-Of-Record: true X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-07/txt/msg00297.txt.bz2 Jerry Quinn writes: > Hi. I started looking at what it would take to convert zlib to build > with c++. The zlib library in gcc is actually a copy of upstream sources, so I don't think it would be a good idea to make this change. We should stay as close to the upstream source as possible. Ian