on 06/07/2012 18:10 Warner Losh said the following:
I think it shouldn't be there. It is non-standard behavior both in the gcc
world and in the freebsd world. It does save a little on makefiles on some
ports, but most ports already grok things are in /usr/local or opt/local and
cope.
on 06/07/2012 19:21 Warner Losh said the following:
I didn't, because I know the standard behavior. Turns out, I don't know
today's standard behavior, just the historical behavior of gcc, which has
changed over the life of FreeBSD.
FreeBSD's standard compiler has never included it. There
On Jul 6, 2012, at 1:11 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
On 6 Jul 2012, at 17:54, Andriy Gapon wrote:
Yeah. Honestly speaking I myself was not aware of what is written in that
link
and I thought that our gcc ports (from ports) added /usr/local/include to the
default search path by some
On 2012-07-06 22:44, Warner Losh wrote:
...
The reasons are that /usr/local/include superceds anything in /usr/include.
This is dangerous. Users should get just the system default libraries and
headers when they compile unless they ask for more. That's what makes it
stupid.
Well, one
on 06/07/2012 22:11 David Chisnall said the following:
On 6 Jul 2012, at 17:54, Andriy Gapon wrote:
Yeah. Honestly speaking I myself was not aware of what is written in that
link and I thought that our gcc ports (from ports) added /usr/local/include
to the default search path by some
