Re: ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 02:32:11PM -0800, Shankar Unni wrote: >Peter Ekberg wrote: > >>I have now, http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26052 > >Indeed, as one of the adds to this bug said, this is a target (i.e. >cygwin)-specific issue. > >On Linux, gcc (at least 4.0.x, which Redhat FC4 comes with) prints out >only __STDC_HOSTED__=1 when you do > > cpp -undef -dM < /dev/null > >I'm guessing this should be taken to cygwin-apps now? Why would it be taken to cygwin-apps? This isn't a packaging issue. cgf -- 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/
Re: ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
Peter Ekberg wrote: I have now, http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26052 Indeed, as one of the adds to this bug said, this is a target (i.e. cygwin)-specific issue. On Linux, gcc (at least 4.0.x, which Redhat FC4 comes with) prints out only __STDC_HOSTED__=1 when you do cpp -undef -dM < /dev/null I'm guessing this should be taken to cygwin-apps now? -- 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/
Re: ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
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.
> >> >
> >> > 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/
Re: ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
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.
>> >
>> > GCC maintainer, are you there? Can you come out and play, please? :-)
>>
>> Ping.
> Pong.
Peng.
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?
Gerrit
--
=^..^=
--
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/
Re: ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
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.
> >
> > GCC maintainer, are you there? Can you come out and play, please? :-)
>
> Ping.
Pong.
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/
Re: ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
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.
>
> GCC maintainer, are you there? Can you come out and play, please? :-)
Ping.
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/
Re: ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 10:49:38PM -0600, * * wrote: > On 1/16/06, Peter Ekberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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::. > > Apparently some macros must remain defined. What macros specifically > did you notice still defined that you would consider "system-specific" > (i.e. __cygwin__ or __CYGWIN__ or CYGWIN) or "gcc-specific"? Well, "cpp -undef -mD < /dev/null" gives me this list: #define __unix 1 #define __STDC_HOSTED__ 1 #define __unix__ 1 #define unix 1 #define __CYGWIN__ 1 #define __CYGWIN32__ 1 I would consider all but __STDC_HOSTED__ system/gcc-specific. Which should be apparent if you read the "*Note Standard Predefined Macros" in the above quote, as that's the only define listed in the note. In my specific case, the configure script is looking for a way to not have "unix" defined. FWIW, the provided patch fixes all of the above, so that the output from the above command is: #define __STDC_HOSTED__ 1 It seems I'm not the only one with this problem, even though cpp now seems to be in better shape in this regard: http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-05/msg01613.html 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/
Re: ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
On 1/16/06, Peter Ekberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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::.
Apparently some macros must remain defined. What macros specifically
did you notice still defined that you would consider "system-specific"
(i.e. __cygwin__ or __CYGWIN__ or CYGWIN) or "gcc-specific"?
> >
> > 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.
>
> GCC maintainer, are you there? Can you come out and play, please? :-)
>
> 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/
>
>
--
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/
ATT: gcc maintainer (was Re: cpp does not honor the -undef option.)
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.
GCC maintainer, are you there? Can you come out and play, please? :-)
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/
