At 17:15 Uhr -0800 04.11.2002, Ben Hines wrote:
This sounds like a great idea.-Ben On Monday, November 4, 2002, at 05:00 PM, Justin Hallett wrote:so as a temp fix why don't we make use of GCC: 3.1 and if GCC: 3.1 then CPPFLAGS = -I/sw/include instead of -isystem??
A great idea? Well, it would be OK to do... but so far, I only saw the examples on the list where this might be useful, and it's trivial enough to work around the problem in a clean way w/o adding such special cases to the code.
The more special assumption Fink makes about packages (like the one Justin suggested here), the harder it becomes to write packages, because you have to know all the special cases and extra rules. Unless there is a strong need for this ("strong need" meaning for me that a lot of packages suffer from this), I don't think we should add this.
Note that I already built dozens of dozens packages with current CVS of Fink, including my existing system, and a fresh bootstrap, and including such packages as kdebase3-ssl and other things. So far I haven't encountered a problem I couldn't resolve easily, and not a single issue of the above mentioned GCC bug.
Cheers,
Max
--
-----------------------------------------------
Max Horn
Software Developer
email: <mailto:max@;quendi.de>
phone: (+49) 6151-494890
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: ApacheCon, November 18-21 in
Las Vegas (supported by COMDEX), the only Apache event to be
fully supported by the ASF. http://www.apachecon.com
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
