* [Bug pch/19541] deprecation of -I- makes precompiled headers less usable
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2005-10-06 20:41 ` rodolfo at rodsoft dot org
2006-04-12 20:19 ` [Bug preprocessor/19541] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: rodolfo at rodsoft dot org @ 2005-10-06 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from rodolfo at rodsoft dot org 2005-10-06 20:41 -------
This also happens with 3.4.4
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug preprocessor/19541] deprecation of -I- makes precompiled headers less usable
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2005-10-06 20:41 ` [Bug pch/19541] deprecation of -I- makes precompiled headers less usable rodolfo at rodsoft dot org
@ 2006-04-12 20:19 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-04-13 16:45 ` [Bug preprocessor/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2006-04-12 20:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-12 20:19 -------
Patch posted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg01197.html
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL| |http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
| |patches/2006-
| |03/msg01197.html
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|pch |preprocessor
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Keywords| |patch
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-04-12 20:19:18
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug preprocessor/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2005-10-06 20:41 ` [Bug pch/19541] deprecation of -I- makes precompiled headers less usable rodolfo at rodsoft dot org
2006-04-12 20:19 ` [Bug preprocessor/19541] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2006-04-13 16:45 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-02 21:58 ` levengcc at pleetveern dot com
` (9 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2006-04-13 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-13 16:45 -------
*** Bug 27137 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |trt at acm dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug preprocessor/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2006-04-13 16:45 ` [Bug preprocessor/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-03-02 21:58 ` levengcc at pleetveern dot com
2008-01-18 20:12 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: levengcc at pleetveern dot com @ 2007-03-02 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from levengcc at pleetveern dot com 2007-03-02 21:58 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> Patch posted here:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg01197.html
>
This patch would meet my needs if the -I- option is removed from gcc. Without
it
or the -I- option, I would have to find a new compiler to work with my codebase
(it makes extensive use of VPATHs similar to the nmake's viewpathing feature
and it would be impractical to edit all header file references to change them
from "" to <>).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug preprocessor/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2007-03-02 21:58 ` levengcc at pleetveern dot com
@ 2008-01-18 20:12 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-18 22:23 ` [Bug c/19541] " tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-18 20:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 19:51 -------
*** Bug 34855 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ISPARRY at BROCADE dot COM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-18 20:12 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-18 22:23 ` tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-19 1:06 ` ISPARRY at BROCADE dot COM
` (6 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-18 22:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 21:52 -------
Changing component; the patch here doesn't touch the preprocessor at all.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |tromey at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
Component|preprocessor |c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-18 22:23 ` [Bug c/19541] " tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-19 1:06 ` ISPARRY at BROCADE dot COM
2008-07-30 15:41 ` dvilleneuve at kronos dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ISPARRY at BROCADE dot COM @ 2008-01-19 1:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from ISPARRY at BROCADE dot COM 2008-01-19 00:53 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> Changing component; the patch here doesn't touch the preprocessor at all.
>
If you are changing the component, would not a better choice be "driver" than
"c"?
I agree the patch does not touch the preprocessor code, but from a user point
of view it is a preprocessor issue. The 4.2.2 manuals say in section 3.11 that
"The preprocessor's direct interface is undocumented and subject to change, so
whenever possible you should avoid using -Wp and let the driver handle the
options instead." A user could reasonably (but wrongly) assume that the driver
passes options like -I to the preprocessor.
If you are changing the component, then can you change the severity to
something more suitable than "enhancment" at the same time? Whilst I am all in
favour of emitting warnings about obsolete features, until there is a working
replacement for -I- it is a bug to complain that it is deprecated.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-19 1:06 ` ISPARRY at BROCADE dot COM
@ 2008-07-30 15:41 ` dvilleneuve at kronos dot com
2008-07-30 17:45 ` tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: dvilleneuve at kronos dot com @ 2008-07-30 15:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #10 from dvilleneuve at kronos dot com 2008-07-30 15:39 -------
An updated patch for gcc 4.3 is available in the following message:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00653.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2008-07-30 15:41 ` dvilleneuve at kronos dot com
@ 2008-07-30 17:45 ` tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-08-30 23:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-07-30 17:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #11 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-30 17:44 -------
Please ping that patch on the gcc-patches list.
Thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2008-07-30 17:45 ` tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-08-30 23:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-08-30 23:39 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-08-30 23:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-30 23:31 -------
*** Bug 37291 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |steve dot gcc at telxio dot
| |com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2008-08-30 23:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-08-30 23:39 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-01-14 12:19 ` Johannes dot Schwenke at gmx dot de
2010-05-18 19:49 ` chris dot litchfield at gmail dot com
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-08-30 23:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-30 23:37 -------
*** Bug 37292 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2008-08-30 23:39 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-01-14 12:19 ` Johannes dot Schwenke at gmx dot de
2010-05-18 19:49 ` chris dot litchfield at gmail dot com
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Johannes dot Schwenke at gmx dot de @ 2009-01-14 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #14 from Johannes dot Schwenke at gmx dot de 2009-01-14 12:18 -------
Please, could anyone increase priority and serverity of this bug?
The current documentation that pretends that -iquote could work as replacement
is plain wrong. A proper replacement for -I- is needed. A solution has been
proposed long ago. Fixes are around.
Of course, like other people
(http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34855#c5) my favourite solution
would be if you could "undo the deprecation of -I-, as it is used by other
compilers."
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-8743@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2009-01-14 12:19 ` Johannes dot Schwenke at gmx dot de
@ 2010-05-18 19:49 ` chris dot litchfield at gmail dot com
12 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: chris dot litchfield at gmail dot com @ 2010-05-18 19:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #15 from chris dot litchfield at gmail dot com 2010-05-18 19:48 -------
This is still a huge issue. We would wish to inhibit use of the CURRENT
Working directory to find include files. Basically FORCE every time a new
include file is found with #include to start AGAIN from the begining of the
Include Path system. using -iquote will simply cause the same problem where an
include file that includes another include file will include that sub-include
file even if you can pulled it away in a previous include path.
Make files with VPATH or put Development paths first in lists are totally hosed
by removing the -I- functionality. This is NOT an enhancement but a Priority 2
bug which there is NO WORKAROUND provided by removing a feature.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2010-12-06 20:07 ` fergusoc at us dot ibm.com
2010-12-06 20:13 ` chris.litchfield at gmail dot com
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: fergusoc at us dot ibm.com @ 2010-12-06 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
Chris Ferguson <fergusoc at us dot ibm.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |fergusoc at us dot ibm.com
--- Comment #16 from Chris Ferguson <fergusoc at us dot ibm.com> 2010-12-06 20:06:51 UTC ---
So is this item a) still unresolved b) resolved but not verified/released c)
never to be resolved ?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2010-12-06 20:07 ` fergusoc at us dot ibm.com
@ 2010-12-06 20:13 ` chris.litchfield at gmail dot com
2010-12-08 15:59 ` fergusoc at us dot ibm.com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: chris.litchfield at gmail dot com @ 2010-12-06 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
--- Comment #17 from Chris Litchfield <chris.litchfield at gmail dot com> 2010-12-06 20:13:30 UTC ---
All versions since 4.0.0 seem to still have this issue. We are still awaiting
it, and its not assigned to anyone either.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2010-12-06 20:07 ` fergusoc at us dot ibm.com
2010-12-06 20:13 ` chris.litchfield at gmail dot com
@ 2010-12-08 15:59 ` fergusoc at us dot ibm.com
2010-12-08 16:11 ` chris.litchfield at gmail dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: fergusoc at us dot ibm.com @ 2010-12-08 15:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
--- Comment #18 from Chris Ferguson <fergusoc at us dot ibm.com> 2010-12-08 15:59:03 UTC ---
So there is no hope for this option then ? Anybody have a work around... We
are considering drastic measures to work around this.
Thanks,
Chris
From: "chris.litchfield at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: Christopher Ferguson/Burlington/IBM@IBMUS
Date: 12/06/2010 03:14 PM
Subject: [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just
besides -iquote
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
--- Comment #17 from Chris Litchfield <chris.litchfield at gmail dot com>
2010-12-06 20:13:30 UTC ---
All versions since 4.0.0 seem to still have this issue. We are still
awaiting
it, and its not assigned to anyone either.
--
Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-12-08 15:59 ` fergusoc at us dot ibm.com
@ 2010-12-08 16:11 ` chris.litchfield at gmail dot com
2011-02-14 22:54 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: chris.litchfield at gmail dot com @ 2010-12-08 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
--- Comment #19 from Chris Litchfield <chris.litchfield at gmail dot com> 2010-12-08 16:10:47 UTC ---
For now, we keep the -iquote in and hope the other parts are not removed. In
our shop we have many different functions to try and mitigate the problem.
Include files have #defines at the top to prevent the includes from being
double included, use the proper syntax of #include <> and #include "" when
appropriate. Hard coding the include path is just horrible for coding and
deemed unacceptable for us.
One of the workarounds is drastic but involves configuration management to the
extreme. All source files and include files in the same directory and to
verify that NO include files are ever duplicated. This can be done and use
virtual designs for your "projects" in IDEs.
Redesign of the Include files so they do not pull in other include files or
have a layer of include files that include other files but when you change the
sub-include files, it automatically pulls in the above layer include file.
Yes, all these are ugly for something that should be part of ANY include
system. There is a reason an Include Path exists, and to use "shortcuts" as
standard practice inside the compiler hurts everyone here complaining about it.
Quite a few developers just continue to use older compiler versions as no need
to upgrade into some of the pain.
Wish we could assign this to someone. I bet we could keep the needed option as
a separate option (-I-). Dont know what this was last reconfirmed 2006
though...
Chris
(In reply to comment #18)
> So there is no hope for this option then ? Anybody have a work around... We
> are considering drastic measures to work around this.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>
>
>
> From: "chris.litchfield at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
>
> To: Christopher Ferguson/Burlington/IBM@IBMUS
>
> Date: 12/06/2010 03:14 PM
>
> Subject: [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just
> besides -iquote
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
>
> --- Comment #17 from Chris Litchfield <chris.litchfield at gmail dot com>
> 2010-12-06 20:13:30 UTC ---
> All versions since 4.0.0 seem to still have this issue. We are still
> awaiting
> it, and its not assigned to anyone either.
>
> --
> Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2010-12-08 16:11 ` chris.litchfield at gmail dot com
@ 2011-02-14 22:54 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-28 14:15 ` jdrosa at yahoo dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-02-14 22:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |richard_sharman at mitel
| |dot com
--- Comment #20 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-14 22:54:02 UTC ---
*** Bug 47741 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2011-02-14 22:54 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-06-28 14:15 ` jdrosa at yahoo dot com
2012-02-02 13:40 ` achurch+gcc at achurch dot org
2013-06-16 14:52 ` rodolfo at rodsoft dot org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: jdrosa at yahoo dot com @ 2011-06-28 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
David Rosa <jdrosa at yahoo dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jdrosa at yahoo dot com
--- Comment #21 from David Rosa <jdrosa at yahoo dot com> 2011-06-28 14:14:37 UTC ---
I want to add my voice to others who have asked that the priority of this bug
be elevated to P2.
Eliminating the secondary function of -I- as quoted from the GNU preprocessor
documentation is unacceptable.
"Second, the directory containing the current file is not searched for
anything, unless it happens to be one of the directories named by an -I
switch."
Even if a different switch is used, like the -ignore-source-dir I've heard some
rumblings about, can this issue please be elevated in priority and addressed
soon?
For our code base, we utilize gcc along with commercial cross-compilers. All of
the cross-compilers we use support an option that implements the original -I-
behavior and in order to maintain our existing code base, we either -I- to no
longer be deprecated or replaced with a different option that implements the
same behavior.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-28 14:15 ` jdrosa at yahoo dot com
@ 2012-02-02 13:40 ` achurch+gcc at achurch dot org
2013-06-16 14:52 ` rodolfo at rodsoft dot org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: achurch+gcc at achurch dot org @ 2012-02-02 13:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
--- Comment #22 from Andrew Church <achurch+gcc at achurch dot org> 2012-02-02 13:38:49 UTC ---
Created attachment 26553
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26553
Remove deprecation warning for -I- (gcc-4.6.2)
Patch against gcc-4.6.2 to remove the deprecation warning for -I- since there's
no complete replacement for it yet. This will probably ruffle some feathers;
sorry about that.
FWIW, it's my intention to keep this patch updated (at
http://achurch.org/patch-pile/#gcc) until either it's officially undeprecated
or a replacement for the "ignore source directory" functionality of -I- is
available.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* [Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote
[not found] <bug-19541-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2012-02-02 13:40 ` achurch+gcc at achurch dot org
@ 2013-06-16 14:52 ` rodolfo at rodsoft dot org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: rodolfo at rodsoft dot org @ 2013-06-16 14:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
--- Comment #23 from Rodolfo Schulz de Lima <rodolfo at rodsoft dot org> ---
How difficult is it to add a parameter to add paths to precompiled header
search list *only*?
We have a big code base with #include "pch.h" in some source files.
If source file directory is always searched first for headers, this breaks
out-of-source builds, unless the precompiled header is generated in the source
tree. For read-only source trees, this "solution" is unacceptable.
The ideal solution would be a parameter like -ipch <path> that adds <path> to
be searched for precompiled headers *before* the current source directory.
I could spend some time creating a patch, but seeing that others have come with
patches that weren't applied, this kind of demotivate me.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread