Re: C++ include files ``gone''?

[Michael Poole <poole at troilus dot org>]

Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com> writes:

> On Mon, Nov 13, 2000 at 07:24:19PM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
> > thing) -- when I compile gcc, I configure it with prefix /usr/local,
> > but when I install it, it goes into /usr/local/stow/gcc/2.95.2/common
>                                                  ^^^^
> 
> I'd bet that's because you're using stow:
> 
>     http://www.gnu.org/software/stow/stow.html

Yes, I'm using an extensively hacked-up version of stow, since the
"current" stow maintainer has mostly dropped off the face of the earth
(Last release in 1996, and the patches I sent him in 1997 and 1998
only got responses after 4 months or so.  Seriously.).  Having the
install go into /usr/local/stow is very intentional, but I still
consider gcc's behavior to be a problem with gcc and not with the stow
environment.  I am open to being convinced otherwise, but I don't see
offhand when gcc's current behavior is going to be a win over obeying
its configured prefix.

-- Michael