Re: GCC 2.95 does not look in /usr/local/include

[hjl at lucon dot org (H.J. Lu)]

> 
> hjl@lucon.org (H.J. Lu) writes:
> 
> |> > 
> |> > Just in case someone wonders why gcc 2.95 does not find their headers in
> |> > /usr/local/include when prefix != /usr/local I'd suggest to take a look at
> |> > http://egcs.cygnus.com/ml/gcc-patches/1999-07/msg00488.html or
> |> > http://egcs.cygnus.com/ml/gcc-patches/1999-05/msg00477.html.  I won't
> |> > report this bug a third time, but IMHO it is still enough time to fix it
> |> > before the release.
> |> > 
> |> 
> |> I sent a patch many years for Linux to make gcc as the vendor compiler and
> |> it was accepted. However, egcs didn't have the patch and I sent it again.
> 
> And in which way is this related to the bug that I have described?
> 

Noone should use --prefix=/usr without --with-local-prefix=/usr/local
when configuring gcc. However, on systems where gcc is the vendor
compiler, people tend to use --prefix=/usr. My patch eliminates the
need for --prefix=/usr.

# ..../configure

will do the right thing if it is on Linux. It is trivial to add
other systems where gcc is the vendor compiler.


-- 
H.J. Lu (hjl@gnu.org)