🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1ecl0rINNihk@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca> besler@geop.ubc.ca (Steve Besler)  
writes:
> 	How do I compile 2.0 source under 3.0?
> I noticed the 2.0CompatibleHeaders directory, does this
> have something to do with it?

Here's what I know, and I'd love to hear more:

When you compile a program written under 2.x on a 3.0
system, the system is supposed to advise you of header
file changes and substitute the right ones.  When it
works, it's really cool and you can go back and fix your
source to the new way and you're fine.

A lot of times, though, it doesn't work.  Then you can look
for the right header file yourself, but we've found that
some of them just seem to be gone!  Some of the structures we
used to use aren't present in the new header files.

In that case, you can run back to your 2.x distribution,
but that's not a good solution. :-( 

> 	Are 2.0 binaries "safe" to run under 3.0 ?

Most of them seem to work fine.  Sone don't.  That might be
because they have left over pieces from 1.x (like old
nibs?).  I don't really know, but the 2.x programs I've had
trouble with were old 2.0 ones.  Stuff I compiled myself
(under 2.1, I think) is OK.  

> 	How about 2.0 source compiled under 3.0 ?

If you can get it to compile, it seems to work.  I've had so
much trouble getting things to compile that I haven't
tried many. :-(

ab