From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25304 invoked by alias); 7 Apr 2004 19:21:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 25255 invoked by alias); 7 Apr 2004 19:21:21 -0000 Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 19:21:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040407192121.25254.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "mark at codesourcery dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040303083528.14400.schmid@snake.iap.physik.tu-darmstadt.de> References: <20040303083528.14400.schmid@snake.iap.physik.tu-darmstadt.de> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug pch/14400] [3.4/3.5 regression] Cannot compile qt-x11-free-3.3.0 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00665.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2004-04-07 19:21 ------- Subject: Re: [3.4/3.5 regression] Cannot compile qt-x11-free-3.3.0 Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >"mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org" writes: > > > >>Can QT be compiled if PCH is explicitly not used? >> >>In other words, could the QT Makefiles work around this problem by not using a >>PCH file? >> >> > >I have confirmed that, if I comment out the line in the QT configure >script where QT tests for PCH support, the build gets past the >previous point of failure, using the 3.4 branch compiler on >i686-pc-linux-gnu. QT takes forever to build on my system; I will >report back in this PR if there is any failure later in the build. >Pending that, the answer to your question is "yes." > > Thanks for the research. Given that, I'll adopt the documentation approach to this problem. PCH seems to be useful for lots of people, but we ought to warn people that there are problems. Thanks, -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14400