Subject: Re: "specs" related problems
From: [email-masked] (Corinna Vinschen)

26 Dec 1998 16:27:29 -0800
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Mumit Khan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]

Mumit Khan wrote:
> 
> I recommend not using `-I <path>' in specs file since that makes it hard
> to override include paths from command line (which should always take
> precendence).
> [...]
> You probably want `-idirafter', so that you can override that from the
> command line. Unfortunately, these options are rather obtuse and confusing
> (I've used these for years, and still get confused).

Thanks for this description. That's really useful. When I wrote my mail,
I have checked only the possibility, to use the `standard' options.
Unfortunately, the following doesn't work:

*cpp:
.... %{lang-c++:-idirafter /usr/include/g++} ...

or

*cpp:
.... %{xc++:-idirafter /usr/include/g++} ...

> Unfortunately, there are no such convenient ways to handle library paths,
> and you might have to do what Corinna suggests (by adding a -L<path> to
> the specs file). I however find it much more convenient to do these via
> Makefiles to avoid confusion as to what paths get searched before what.

I agree with exception: The exception is, that me and others want to
have U*X like standard paths for the file search without to have
to write them into _any_ Makefile. I'm using the environment variables
C_INCLUDE_PATH, CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH and LIBRARY_PATH for that purpose.
As you, I don't like the idea, to change the specs file. You know, I have
other problems with my specs file :(

Regards,
Corinna
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".