Re: Hard-coded gcc header path

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 11 November 2008 21:13:28 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 02:15:29PM +0000, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > 
> > Then the short-term solution for debian is clear.  Simply rebuild the
> > package and add a dependency on a specific gcc version.
> 
> Which sucks badly because the default gcc is not always the same on
> every arch, and more importantly, people may want to use different GCCs.
> It would look like a better idea to ask gcc for its include path
> properly.

Maybe not even that.  It is conceivable to want sparse on systems that
don't even have gcc installed.  The BSDs seem to favor pcc lately.  So
the preferred long-term solution would be for sparse to ship its own
headers.

Jörn

-- 
To recognize individual spam features you have to try to get into the
mind of the spammer, and frankly I want to spend as little time inside
the minds of spammers as possible.
-- Paul Graham
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [LKML]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Trinity Fuzzer Tool]

  Powered by Linux