Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 12:59:41 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Recent upgrade to wish leads to a problem
Message-ID: <20120303175941.GB20711@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <70952A932255A2489522275A628B97C3129F4CE4 AT xmb-sjc-233 DOT amer DOT cisco DOT com> <4F4FC897 DOT 1080604 AT redhat DOT com> <4F4FD01E DOT 1000808 AT bopp DOT net> <4F5072B5 DOT 7060707 AT bellsouth DOT net> <20120302174359 DOT GA8230 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F519EBA DOT 5030607 AT bellsouth DOT net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4F519EBA.5030607@bellsouth.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 10:31:54PM -0600, Robert Miles wrote:
>On 3/2/2012 11:43 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 01:11:49AM -0600, Robert Miles wrote:
>>> On 3/1/2012 1:38 PM, Jeremy Bopp wrote:
>>>> On 03/01/2012 01:05 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
>>>>> On 03/01/2012 10:53 AM, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
>[snip]
>>>>> I suspect not, but I would like to see such recommended and/or 
>>>>> suggested packages. Back when I was using Cygwin gcc so I could 
>>>>> learn C, m4 was not installed along with it, and I believe that m4 
>>>>> should at least be shown as a recommended package to go along with 
>>>>> gcc. 
>>There is no reason to include m4 as a gcc dependency if you are trying
>>to learn C.  This would not even be a case of a suggestion.  If you
>>needed m4 for some reason (maybe for autoconf/automake) that really
>>would be a case where you need to install m4 separately.  You can use
>>gcc quite happily without having m4 installed.
>>
>>For the record, I don't think Yaakov, Corinna, or I are really
>>interested in spending our time adding some sort of suggestion
>>mechanism to setup.exe.  This would have ramifications both for
>>setup.exe, for the script which updates setup.ini, and for the genini
>>script.  It would likely be a fair amount of work.
>>
>>Given the fact that this has come up repeatedly over the years I am
>>pretty sure that repeated suggestions that setup.exe should be modified
>>to do this are likely not going to have any effect.
>>
>The examples I used for learning C all used #include, and therefore
>required m4 in order to compile.  I believe gcc gave an error message
>in this case showing what was missing, and therefore did not slow down
>the learning process too much.

Sorry but m4 has nothing to do with #include.  I don't doubt that you
saw some error that mentioned m4 but it undoubtedly came from a package
which used m4.  gcc itself does not use m4 to expand #include.  #include
files are expanded by gcc automatically without the help of an external
program like m4.

--
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