In article <001201c47802$108bed90$d4c9f4d8@q>,
Sebastián J. D´Alessandro <wonb@uolsinectis.com.ar> wrote:
>
>Hello,
>
>            I´ve compiled the Tendra C/C++ Compiler (http://www.ten15.org/),
>on NetBSD/i386 1.6ZI. I needed to make a few changes on the source files and
>finally it compiles (with gcc and tcc when it is available) and works. I
>would
>like to know if the changes are fine and if they are not, why?.
>
>            There are two changes that I don´t fully understand, first the
>sources of TenDRA redefine: _POSIX_NGROUPS_MAX, _POSIX_OPEN_MAX,
>_POSIX_PATH_MAX. I commented them and let the ones of system effective, Is
>this correct?
>
>            The second problem is about the definition of __RENAME, all the
>posibilities of defining __RENAME creates problems during compiling. I
>solved the problem adding to cdefs.h the following:
>
>                    + #ifdef __TenDRA__
>                    + #define __RENAME(x)
>                    + #else
>                    #error "No function renaming possible"
>                    + #endif
>
>            What are the consecuences of the last change?. I would like to
>hear the opinion of an advanced user, that fully understand the play of
>_POSIX_NGROUPS_MAX, _POSIX_OPEN_MAX, _POSIX_PATH_MAX in the TenDRA sources
>and the play of __RENAME during the compilation of the compiler.
>
>            A complete explanation of the changes and the way of repeat them
>is
>in my page http://webs.uolsinectis.com.ar/gdalessandro/tendra.htm.
>
>Thanks, Sebastián D´Alessandro.

The _POSIX_FOO defines, don't matter. The __RENAME(x) macro you need to
port to the equivalent for the tendra compiler.


void foo(void) __RENAME(__foo13);

is functionally equivalent to defining:

void __foo13(void);

to be the same as foo.

christos