X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:37:05 +0100
From: "Gerrit P. Haase" <gerrit@familiehaase.de>
Reply-To: "Gerrit P. Haase" <gerrit@familiehaase.de>
Message-ID: <132753246.20060131213705@familiehaase.de>
To: Peter Ekberg <peda@lysator.liu.se>
CC: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
In-Reply-To: <20060130123625.GA11508@sellafield.lysator.liu.se>
References: <20060109095759.GB24524@sellafield.lysator.liu.se>  <20060116111311.GC10265@sellafield.lysator.liu.se>  <20060123210144.GA10690@sellafield.lysator.liu.se>  <20060130123625.GA11508@sellafield.lysator.liu.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie.com@cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe@cygwin.com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help@cygwin.com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com

Peter schrieb:

> On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 10:01:44PM +0100, Peter Ekberg wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 12:13:12PM +0100, Peter Ekberg wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 10:58:00AM +0100, Peter Ekberg wrote:
>> > > Hello!
>> > > 
>> > > I recently tried to build a package that was using cpp for other
>> > > purposes than preprocessing C files. Its configure script was
>> > > looking for a way to not have cpp predefine anything, and it
>> > > specifically tried the -undef option, but failed. From reading the
>> > > docs, I couldn't figure out why. Here's a quote from "info cpp":
>> > > 
>> > > '-undef'
>> > >      Do not predefine any system-specific or GCC-specific macros.  The
>> > >      standard predefined macros remain defined.  *Note Standard
>> > >      Predefined Macros::.
>> > > 
>> > > So I searched the web a bit and figured that I could probably fix
>> > > it in the specs file. I realise that the specs file probably isn't
>> > > the canonical place to change this, but I'll leave that to the gcc
>> > > maintainer.
>> > > 
>> > > Attached is a patch for the specs file that wraps all old define
>> > > rules for cpp inside the following:
>> > > 
>> > > %{!undef:old define rules}
>> > > 
>> > > I don't know if this is the correct thing to do, but it works for
>> > > me<TM>.
>> > 
>> > GCC maintainer, are you there? Can you come out and play, please? :-)
>> 
>> Ping.

> Pong.

Peng.


Looks like a reasonable approach to fix this.  However, the specs should
not override -undef, looks like a bug in cpp.  Have you reported this as
a bug to the gcc bug tracker?


Gerrit
-- 
=^..^=


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/