delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: | No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS |
X-Spam-Check-By: | sourceware.org |
Message-ID: | <4A7F3AAD.2070105@users.sourceforge.net> |
Date: | Sun, 09 Aug 2009 16:07:57 -0500 |
From: | "Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" <yselkowitz AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090715 Thunderbird/3.0b3 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Subject: | Re: cc/c89/c99 as aliases for gcc [was Re: gcc4: cc] |
References: | <49C0467A DOT 1080404 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <49C07906 DOT 2060504 AT gmail DOT com> <49C07E09 DOT 5070909 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <4A7F2F68 DOT 3090307 AT gmail DOT com> |
In-Reply-To: | <4A7F2F68.3090307@gmail.com> |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.com> |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
On 09/08/2009 15:19, Dave Korn wrote: > This makes me think that I should not ship anything by those names that is > merely an alias for gcc. It would help broken packages that assume the > existence of cc, but break any that assume the semantics of cc. I'm not sure > which of those two is best. IIRC packages (usually just hand-written Makefiles) using 'cc' (or $(CC), which make(1) defaults to 'cc') are just using it to mean a generic C compiler. I really don't think they care about SUSv2. OTOH, not having a 'cc' at all would make things really difficult. > It's possible that there might be a command-line switch to implement this > behaviour in 4.5.0, in which case the problem will be moot and I can ship simple > wrapper scripts that pass through the command-line options adding the new switch > as they go, but I'm inclined to /not/ include simple alternatives-based aliases. Makes sense wrt c89/c99. Yaakov -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |