On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.n...@arm.com> wrote:
> On 23/10/15 18:39, Doug Evans wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Bernd Schmidt <bschm...@redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/21/2015 09:00 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I happened to notice local prefixes not working with musl.
>>>> Fixes thusly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Index: config/linux.h
>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> --- config/linux.h (revision 229130)
>>>> +++ config/linux.h (working copy)
>>>> @@ -174,6 +174,7 @@
>>>> #define INCLUDE_DEFAULTS \
>>>> { \
>>>> INCLUDE_DEFAULTS_MUSL_GPP \
>>>> + INCLUDE_DEFAULTS_MUSL_LOCAL \
>>>> INCLUDE_DEFAULTS_MUSL_PREFIX \
>>>> INCLUDE_DEFAULTS_MUSL_CROSS \
>>>> INCLUDE_DEFAULTS_MUSL_TOOL \
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Looks pretty obvious given that the macro isn't otherwise used AFAICT.
>>> However, I have no idea whether the order is right, since the purpose of all
>>> this code here is apparently only to provide a different order than the
>>> default.
>>>
>>> So, someone who worked on the original musl patches should comment. I
>>> would also like to know precisely which ordering change over the default is
>>> required, and that it be documented. Ideally we'd come up with a solution
>>> that makes us not duplicate all this stuff in linux.h.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bernd
>>
>>
>> Crap, sorry for the resend. Grrrr gmail ...
>>
>> The only significant different AFAICT is that GCC_INCLUDE_DIR is moved
>> to later (last).
>> Why this is is briefly described in the intro comment:
>>
>> config/linux.h:
>> /* musl avoids problematic includes by rearranging the include
>> directories.
>> * Unfortunately, this is mostly duplicated from cppdefault.c */
>>
>> I've put LOCAL in the same place as the default (as defined by
>> cppdefault.c),
>> so one could separate the issues here ...
>>
>> 1) Where does LOCAL go for musl?
>
>
> LOCAL should go the same place as in cppdefault.c
> so the patch is ok.
Committed. Thanks.
