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/