Am Fri, 7 Oct 2016 02:00:34 -0700 Mark Millard <mar...@dsl-only.net> schrieb:
> O. Hartmann ohartman at zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote on Fri Oct 7 08:26:27 UTC > 2016 . . . > > . . . of having problems with not finding <stddef.h> during some port builds. > > > Is there a difference in the -isystem command line options for c++ for the > working vs. > failing contexts? > > I will presume that there is based on the following. . . (At least it gives > you > something to look into.) > > > > The issue is not specific to just graphics/opencv-core and graphics/blender > ports: > others also have problems with the use of -isystem for C++ compiles. See: > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213217 > > in particular Comment #2 from Dimitry Andric. > > The problem is in how -isystem is used vs. what is needed for libc++ 3.8.0 . > > From O. Hartmann's message text: > > . . . > > -isystem /usr/local/include/eigen3 -isystem /usr/include/include -O2 -pipe > > -O3 > . . . > > In file included from /usr/include/c++/v1/algorithm:624: In file included > > from /usr/include/c++/v1/initializer_list:47: > > /usr/include/c++/v1/cstddef:43:15: fatal > > error: 'stddef.h' file not found #include_next <stddef.h> ^ --- > . . . > > In file included from /usr/include/c++/v1/algorithm:624: In file included > > from /usr/include/c++/v1/initializer_list:47: > > /usr/include/c++/v1/cstddef:43:15: fatal > > error: 'stddef.h' file not found #include_next <stddef.h> > > > Dimitry wrote for this issue of <stddef.h> not being found: > > > Summary: If for some reason you must completely rebuild the header search > > path > > from scratch, you need to add -isystem /usr/include/c++/v1 *before* > > -isystem > > /usr/include. But it is better not to do this at all. :) > > There is more background/supporting information in that comment. > > === > Mark Millard > markmi at dsl-only.net Hello Mark, thanks a lot for the hint. I can not fathom - at the moment - what is different on the two failing systems compared to the non-failing ones. There must be something changing the order of how the include path is searched now - presumably I understood Dimitry Andric comment right (who explains the problem very good for my taste). I will make a reference to Dimitri's comment on both PRs I filed. Oliver
pgpGvh4tB1RU1.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature