This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: -MM, 2.95 vs 3.0

From: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk>
To: Ian Britten <britten at caris dot com>
Cc: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 22:56:25 +0000
Subject: Re: -MM, 2.95 vs 3.0
References: <20020219151325.794f2206.britten@caris.com> <3C72C969.D1140DE5@codesourcery.com> <20020219184548.19fb6645.britten@caris.com>

Ian Britten wrote:-

> [ FYI - Reminder... 
>   Note that GCC v3.0.1 does _not_ behave as you/Neil describe (ie. that the
>   dependencies are for all non-SYSTEM files), but is still as I described
>   (Only files included via "").  Newer versions may work the way you
>   describe (Haven't tried yet), but if you think 3.0.1 behaves the way you
>   describe, there may be a bug in it... ]

Yah, like I said (in the newsgroup) 3.0.x's idea of a "system header
file" is a little screwy.  3.1 is as I described.

Neil.

References:
- -MM, 2.95 vs 3.0
  - From: Ian Britten
- Re: -MM, 2.95 vs 3.0
  - From: Nathan Sidwell
- Re: -MM, 2.95 vs 3.0
  - From: Ian Britten

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]