From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28422 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2004 06:14:53 -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 28413 invoked by uid 48); 14 Apr 2004 06:14:53 -0000 Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 08:04:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040414061453.28412.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040221172413.14238.carlo@gcc.gnu.org> References: <20040221172413.14238.carlo@gcc.gnu.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug pch/14238] Dependency tracking and PCH X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg01141.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-04-14 06:14 ------- > It is not correct behaviour. > If you delete a2.h then the PCH file SHOULD be made > (it depends on a2.h) and would fail. Deleting it is > no different than changing it. When you change it, > then you want both, the PCH file to be remade as well > as all compilation units depending on a2.h (not pch.h). Right, but a.o does not directly depend on a2.h. a.o depends on pch.h.gch which depends on a2.h. It sounds like what you want is the answer to the question "if the -include was not passed, what would the dependencies of a.o be?" You can get that answer by asking that question: by using g++-cvs-3.4 -E a.cc -MD -MP -MT a.o -MF a.deps -o /dev/null Alternatively, you might be wanting the answer to the question "if PCH was not used, what would the dependencies of a.o be?" You can get the answer to that question by using the -fpch-deps flag. Bug 14933 already covers the problem that pch.h.gch is not mentioned in the dependency list of a.o. -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14238