Re: gcc 3.2's cpp breaks configure scripts

[John David Anglin]

> On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Paul Eggert said:
> > If GCC warned only when there was a real problem, a lot of these issues
> > would go away.
> 
> Alternatively, GCC could simply ignore the -I switches that would
> trigger those warnings in situations where those warnings are now
> emitted. Is there ever any reason you'd *want* GCC to do that

I think you have to assume the user knows best and wants the change
in ordering and error treatment.  If you want to test warnings from
system headers, you can use -nostdinc and configure system and user
headers as you wish.

> reordering? I can't think of any occasion when I'd want to avoid
> fixincluded headers... they have after all been fixincluded for a
> reason (and if the fixincluded headers are broken the solution is
> to delete the broken ones and fix fixincludes, not to supply
> an extra -I/usr/include switch to everything!)

Agreed but hey this is "unix".  Anybody know which autoconf macro
was responsible for the "-I/usr/include" in the original problem
report?  The current gettext macros which have caused problems
for me don't add /usr/include.

Dave
-- 
J. David Anglin                                  address@hidden
National Research Council of Canada              (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6605)