X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 23:17:33 +0100
From: Peter Ekberg <peda AT lysator DOT liu DOT se>
To: "Gerrit P. Haase" <gerrit AT familiehaase DOT de>
Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
Message-ID: <20060131221733.GA3617@sellafield.lysator.liu.se>
References: <20060109095759 DOT GB24524 AT sellafield DOT lysator DOT liu DOT se> <20060116111311 DOT GC10265 AT sellafield DOT lysator DOT liu DOT se> <20060123210144 DOT GA10690 AT sellafield DOT lysator DOT liu DOT se> <20060130123625 DOT GA11508 AT sellafield DOT lysator DOT liu DOT se> <132753246 DOT 20060131213705 AT familiehaase DOT de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <132753246.20060131213705@familiehaase.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT 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 Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 09:37:05PM +0100, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> 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.

Pang.

> 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?

I have now, http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26052

Let's see what happens.

Cheers,
Peter

--
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/