on 07/07/2012 11:20 David Chisnall said the following:
> On 6 Jul 2012, at 23:29, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
>> I think that this is a dummy argument. One could easily want his LOCALBASE
>> to
>> be /opt and the real ports system should support that. So what ports
>> currently
>> do, they really ha
On 6 Jul 2012, at 23:29, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> I think that this is a dummy argument. One could easily want his LOCALBASE to
> be /opt and the real ports system should support that. So what ports
> currently
> do, they really have to do (assuming $LOCALBASE as opposed to /usr/local).
That's co
on 07/07/2012 00:45 Dimitry Andric said the following:
> On 2012-07-06 22:44, Warner Losh wrote:
> ...
>> The reasons are that /usr/local/include superceds anything in /usr/include.
>> This is dangerous. Users should get just the system default libraries and
>> headers when they compile unless
on 06/07/2012 22:11 David Chisnall said the following:
> On 6 Jul 2012, at 17:54, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
>> Yeah. Honestly speaking I myself was not aware of what is written in that
>> link and I thought that our gcc ports (from ports) added /usr/local/include
>> to the default search path by some
On 2012-07-06 22:44, Warner Losh wrote:
...
> The reasons are that /usr/local/include superceds anything in /usr/include.
> This is dangerous. Users should get just the system default libraries and
> headers when they compile unless they ask for more. That's what makes it
> stupid.
Well, one
On Jul 6, 2012, at 1:11 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 6 Jul 2012, at 17:54, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
>> Yeah. Honestly speaking I myself was not aware of what is written in that
>> link
>> and I thought that our gcc ports (from ports) added /usr/local/include to the
>> default search path by som
On 6 Jul 2012, at 17:54, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> Yeah. Honestly speaking I myself was not aware of what is written in that
> link
> and I thought that our gcc ports (from ports) added /usr/local/include to the
> default search path by some mistake. And if somebody asked me what I thought
> about
on 06/07/2012 19:21 Warner Losh said the following:
> I didn't, because I know the standard behavior. Turns out, I don't know
> today's standard behavior, just the historical behavior of gcc, which has
> changed over the life of FreeBSD.
>
> FreeBSD's standard compiler has never included it. The
ons.
Warner
>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 6:34 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Inviting wider audience to the discussion.
>>>
>>> ---- Original Message ----
>>> Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 00:43:58 +0300
>>> From: Andriy Gapon
>>&g
2012 00:43:58 +0300
>> From: Andriy Gapon
>> Subject: Re: gcc46 header search path
>>
>> on 05/07/2012 17:15 Andriy Gapon said the following:
>>>
>>> Gerald,
>>>
>>> while thinking what to reply in our other conversation I ran into
ul 6, 2012, at 6:34 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
> Inviting wider audience to the discussion.
>
> Original Message
> Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 00:43:58 +0300
> From: Andriy Gapon
> Subject: Re: gcc46 header search path
>
> on 05/07/2012 17:15 Andriy Ga
Inviting wider audience to the discussion.
Original Message
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 00:43:58 +0300
From: Andriy Gapon
Subject: Re: gcc46 header search path
on 05/07/2012 17:15 Andriy Gapon said the following:
>
> Gerald,
>
> while thinking what to reply
12 matches
Mail list logo
