On Sun, 17 Jun 2018 at 17:49, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: > > On 06/15/2018 11:52 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > My preference is implemented by the attached patch. > > > This is pretty much what I was looking at doing. I say go!
Thanks for the feedback, I'll add <version> later today. > > While on the subject, should we just delete some of this autoconf-junk > > from our c++config.h headers? > > > > /* Name of package */ > > /* #undef _GLIBCXX_PACKAGE */ > > > > /* Define to the address where bug reports for this package should be > > sent. */ > > #define _GLIBCXX_PACKAGE_BUGREPORT "" > > > > /* Define to the full name of this package. */ > > #define _GLIBCXX_PACKAGE_NAME "package-unused" > > > > /* Define to the full name and version of this package. */ > > #define _GLIBCXX_PACKAGE_STRING "package-unused version-unused" > > > > /* Define to the one symbol short name of this package. */ > > #define _GLIBCXX_PACKAGE_TARNAME "libstdc++" > > > > /* Define to the home page for this package. */ > > #define _GLIBCXX_PACKAGE_URL "" > > > > /* Define to the version of this package. */ > > #define _GLIBCXX_PACKAGE__GLIBCXX_VERSION "version-unused" > > > I don't have an opinion here except if this is unused cruft let's lose > it. I think we *are* supposed to have some project and version > identification. We have _GLIBCXX_* everywhere. The folks that use > libstdc++ *outside* of g++ might have some opinions about this too. I think they're more likely to use _GLIBCXX_RELEASE (and maybe __GLIBCXX__ although that's not very useful) as documented at https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/using_macros.html The PACKAGE_* macros are defined by autoconf for the package's own use, typically for the output of "cmd --version" and for naming tarballs. Libstdc++ isn't a standalone package, doesn't have a --version option, and isn't distributed in its own tarball.
