On Sun, Mar 30, 2003 at 09:09:18AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 03:19:05PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 08:08:54PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
Sigh. It's been a while since I've fixed the feature of gcc(1)
that makes it hide warnings in
On Sun, Mar 30, 2003 at 02:07:20PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sun, Mar 30, 2003 at 09:09:18AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 03:19:05PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 08:08:54PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
Sigh. It's been a while since
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 08:08:54PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
Sigh. It's been a while since I've fixed the feature of gcc(1)
that makes it hide warnings in system headers (but visible with
-nostdinc -I/usr/include).
What is the difference in output from make buildworld?
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 03:19:05PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 08:08:54PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
Sigh. It's been a while since I've fixed the feature of gcc(1)
that makes it hide warnings in system headers (but visible with
-nostdinc -I/usr/include).
What
Sigh. It's been a while since I've fixed the feature of gcc(1)
that makes it hide warnings in system headers (but visible with
-nostdinc -I/usr/include). I've stumbled upon a problem today,
wondering, why the hell cpp(1) wasn't complaining me about the
redefines, and the answer was: GNU cpp(1)
