From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 6D3DE385770A; Fri, 26 May 2023 17:42:04 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6D3DE385770A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1685122924; bh=3204AOUolal+DcGG0TxUU3UxYlQxFTDPnElsNKZkfE0=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=siKnqLhN9Z03iKPVcBt82aYToJtMympKdSih85KLs3hXOASLa6jTX8w8FBHu9xSER fqBwYcLUGoArX1suGalMcHzvRWKxJK0MR+qmpc7ZjHwLbSC2UNs33H6wS5GhCMRS3P zA5g5hOKezrTjbWwti42WJVrgsPm3AiQih2/Gvk4= From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug preprocessor/109988] -iwithprefix doesn't add folder to end of search list Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 17:42:03 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: preprocessor X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.3.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: documentation X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cf_reconfirmed_on keywords component bug_status everconfirmed Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D109988 Andrew Pinski changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last reconfirmed| |2023-05-26 Keywords| |documentation Component|c++ |preprocessor Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- It has been the same as -isystem since at least r0-21114-g0b22d65c9a10ce (M= arch 1999). The documentation was changed (added to) at r0-35796-gf3c9b8530c78ce (June 2001) to specify the same as -idirafter even though the implementation was something different .... I don't know what the correct thing to do really since it has been almost 22 years of having the documentation not match the implementation ... Maybe just update the documentation .... Confirmed either way.=