This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: adding 'g++-v3/cshadow' to cpp search path...
- To: brent at rcfile dot org
- Subject: Re: adding 'g++-v3/cshadow' to cpp search path...
- From: Loren James Rittle <rittle at latour dot rsch dot comm dot mot dot com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:14:59 -0500 (CDT)
- CC: libstdc++ at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <20000822221720.B24998@rcfile.org>
- Reply-to: rittle at rsch dot comm dot mot dot com
In article <20000822221720.B24998@rcfile.org>,
brent verner <brent@rcfile.org> writes:
> I'm setting this up so the shadow directory, tentatively named
> cshadow, will contain _all_ shadowed headers (from shadow and cshadow
> from the current libstdc++-v3 build) and live within the current
> installed g++-v3 include directory. It should be very simple to
> change the name from cshadow, however.
Hi Brent,
My comments are triggered off the phrase: ``current installed g++-v3
include directory''.
(1) Any solution *must* allow checking the build tree in-place before
final installation.
(2) It must not matter if a previous version of gcc is installed in
the target location (as expressed by --prefix and the more exotic
configure arguments).
(3) Other than getting files from a different directory, the fully
bootstrapped compiler must behave the same before and after
installation.
(4) Merely building a new compiler must not affect any installed
compiler.
I raise these issues only because when I started playing with
libstdc++-v3, there were minor issues in areas (1) and (2). I fixed
all I knew of last I could build v3 (another issue entirely ;-).
FYI, when I was trying to resolve the -I mess last time, Jeff Law said
that it is OK to create a staging directory in the build tree that
mirrors the final install location, if you need to. Sorry for being
so wordy, but you asked for comments before you do work in this
area...
Final meta comment: I wouldn't mind seeing all the -I hackery going
away (including all that I last added ;-) by seeing a fully staged
version of include being built. However, it is not my place to make
this decision.
Regards,
Loren