Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!rutgers!labrea!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!jkh
From: jkh@violet.berkeley.edu (Jordan K. Hubbard)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,gnu.gcc
Subject: Re: X.V11R2 xterm all foreground color when compiled with GCC 1.26
Message-ID: <13872@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 3 Sep 88 03:45:20 GMT
References: <20830@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <4739@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <21283@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 18

In article <21283@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> bob@allosaur.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield) writes:
>In article <4739@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> spaf@cs.purdue.edu (Gene Spafford) writes:
>|In article <20830@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> bob@allosaur.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield) writes:
>Thanks to Spaf and the others who pointed out that I simply had to
>compile server/os/4.2bsd/oscolor.c with Sun's cc, because of the
>difference between gcc's and pcc's struct-valued function return
>conventions.  Someday soon I may make a GNU-compiled libdbm.a so this
>step won't be necessary.

Maybe I was suffering from brain-lock, but when I tried this
(linking in a GNU compiled libdbm.a), I got the same result.
I ended up doing much the same thing (compiling oscolor.c with pcc),
but was sort of curious as to why the GNU libdbm tossed its
cookies. Anyone out there care to comment? Should I have
used the gcc -fcompile-dbm-that-special-warm-feeling-kinda-way
flag?

				Jordan