Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 22:27:54 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> Cc: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Make world hosed ? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107182218580.95880-100000@besplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <200107181148.aa00878@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, David Malone wrote: > I would have thought that any file included with > > #include <...> > > would count as a system header file, but it seems gcc has some > other criteron for deciding. I've managed to trace it back to cpp > writing out lines like: > > # 1 "/usr/include/tcpd.h" 1 3 > > where the "3" at the end seems to mean a system header file. And > in tradcpp.c it seems to set a varible system_header_p if the > include is a <...> as opposed to a "...", but I haven't found out > where the "3" comes from yet. > > Ahh - I'm looking at the wrong gcc sources. The 2.95.3 sources > (which uses the old gcc cpp) decides if something is a system > include based on examining a list which doesn't seem to get > initialised if you say "-nostdinc". The newer gcc sources (2.96.20000711 > with the new cpp) seem to do the <...> vs. "..." thing. I thought that it just looks at the path prefix and knows that /usr/include is special. It seems to used -nostdinc too. I don't see how looking at <...> could be right, since double-quoted includes are not wrong for standard headers. In practice, ``#include "tcpd.h"'' gives the same lack of warnings as ``#include <tcpd.h>''. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0107182218580.95880-100000>