On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:54:08PM -0500, J. Johnston wrote: >Chris, > > Can you clarify. Do you want me to duplicate the routine or >stick with the solution I originally presented which is to rename >the routine and leave a #define that maps the old name to the >new one.
I think your plan is fine. I think just renaming the function in newlib and creating a define to deal with legacy newlib apps is the correct way to handle this. We can also make modifications in the cygwin side to make it transparent to the end user. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
