[oe] vdr: questions regarding cplusplus.patch

[Henning Heinold]

On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 08:53:18AM +0100, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Dear Henning and list,
> 
> 
> packaging VDR for OE you added cplusplus.patch [1] to be applied. I am
> trying to get the patches upstream, but I have some questions.
> 
> Is it correct, that the two changes have the following goals?
> 
> 1. Instead of using the C headers which are deprecated use the headers
> provided by C++ as mentioned for example in [2].
> 2. You changed `canonicalize_file_name(FileName);` to
> `realpath(FileName,NULL);`. Is that because OE just support Linux and
> not GNU/Hurd for example [3]?
> 3. I do not understand why a lot of headers are included in tools.h and
> tools.c. But I have to look that up in some reference.
> 

Hi Paul,

with gcc 4.x and 4.4 c++ is stricter at including headers the right way.
So you need to include a couple of headers, because some functions
are not found. You can test it in oe with using binutils 2.20 and
gcc-4.4.2 and leave the patches out.

The problem with canonicalize_file_name was, that the function too
wasn't found with gcc-4.4.2. So I googled and found that
canonicalize_file_name(FileName) is the same as realpath(FileName,NULL),
but realpath was found.

I hope this clears some stuff.

Bye Henning