On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Pavel Roskin wrote: > 1) The new experimental version of GCC doesn't suppress -Wundef in the > system headers. The documentation says that "certain categories of > warnings are suppressed" without naming those categories. This is a change > (intentional or unintentional) of the undocumented behaviour, so we > shouldn't complain to the GCC developers (but we probably should warn them > just in case). > > 2) Autoconf considers headers that generate warnings as nonexistent. This > is a bug in autoconf that needs to be fixed. certainly (otherwise the two - gcc and autoconf - together will be unusable on most platforms). -- T.E.Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dickey.his.com ftp://dickey.his.com
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation problem ... Alexandre Oliva
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation pro... Pavel Roskin
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation problem solved) Paul Eggert
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation problem solv... Pavel Roskin
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation problem ... Alexandre Oliva
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation pro... Pavel Roskin
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation... Paul Eggert
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation... Pavel Roskin
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation... Thomas Dickey
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation... Pavel Roskin
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation... Thomas E. Dickey
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation... Thomas Dickey
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation... Paul Eggert
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation... Thomas Dickey
- Re: grep -E ? (Was: Compilation problem solved) Earnie Boyd