On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 12:32:16PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 06:19:40PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> > > Where we've run across similar problems with posix_types.h in the recent
> > > past, it has indeed been due to the use of "gcc -I-".
>
> > Wow, that is a really insane option. However it is documented as
> > deprecated.
>
> Right.
>
> > > This is tied to
> > > multiarch, in that moving linux-libc-dev headers to the multiarch include
> > > directory triggered the problem; ultimately though I think this is a bug
> > > in
> > > linux-libc-dev for using #include "" here.
>
> > "wontfix"
>
> Would you mind elaborating? The use of #include "" in public headers is
> very unusual, and this seems to be the only instance of it in
> linux-libc-dev. Is there a reason I'm missing why "" needs to be used here
> instead of <>?
I don't know whether it's necessary. But I don't think it's worth
making the change to support a compiler option that was a bad idea in
itself. If you think it is then you can propose the change upstream,
but I don't think I will.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
- Albert Camus
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120214215445.gu12...@decadent.org.uk
