Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 22:13:58 -0500 From: "Crist J. Clark" <cjc@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> To: Jim Bloom <bloom@acm.org> Cc: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@ucb.crimea.ua>, jsegovia@cnc.una.py, freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: cpp change breaks ipfw Message-ID: <20000228221358.C31743@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> In-Reply-To: <38BAABCC.BCA300AB@acm.org>; from bloom@acm.org on Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 12:09:32PM -0500 References: <200002271345.JAA29398@alpha.cnc.una.py> <38B98413.CB910261@acm.org> <20000227221631.A70300@relay.ucb.crimea.ua> <38BAABCC.BCA300AB@acm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 12:09:32PM -0500, Jim Bloom wrote: > To provide an easy workaround for the problem with cpp putting spaces > around expanded macros which causes problems for ipfw, i modified ipfw > to take arbitrary parameter and pass them to the preprocessor. With > cpp, -traditional may be passed on the command line. This patch also > allows for a much wider range of preprocessors since it allows for > arbitrary syntax in the arguments. Patch looks good, but it seems to me the easiest way to modify ipfw to pass more arguments to the preprocessor would just allow the '-p' optarg to be a partial command line. That is, to use the traditional flag you would, # ipfw -p "cpp -traditional" -D<blah>... -U <blah>... file Is there a reason that would not work? -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@home.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000228221358.C31743>