On Sunday 10 May 2009 01:37:32 am Dave Korn wrote:
> I noticed one bit that looked like a typo:
>
> # we don't have this path - it needs some suffix
>
> ITYM 'prefix' here, no?
Indeed. Thanks again.
Brad
Brad Hards wrote:
> On Friday 08 May 2009 10:37:27 pm Dave Korn wrote:
>> Instead of pkg-config, the tradition for GCC is to use one of the
>> driver's default switches. Does
>>
>> gcc -print-file-name=plugin/include/.h
>>
>> work for you?
> For those who'd like to use this with cmake, I wrote u
On Friday 08 May 2009 10:37:27 pm Dave Korn wrote:
> Instead of pkg-config, the tradition for GCC is to use one of the
> driver's default switches. Does
>
> gcc -print-file-name=plugin/include/.h
>
> work for you?
For those who'd like to use this with cmake, I wrote up the results of my work
in
On Friday 08 May 2009 10:37:27 pm Dave Korn wrote:
> Instead of pkg-config, the tradition for GCC is to use one of the
> driver's default switches. Does
>
> gcc -print-file-name=plugin/include/.h
>
> work for you?
$ /opt/gccsvn/bin/gcc -print-file-name=plugin/include/gcc-plugin.h
/opt/gccsvn/bin
Rafael Espindola wrote:
> 2009/5/8 Brad Hards :
>> Hi,
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40004 was a bug report that I
>> filed on the missing plugin headers.
>>
>> That is now resolved - the headers are installed. I've closed the bug report.
>>
>> However I'm not sure how my applic
2009/5/8 Brad Hards :
> Hi,
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40004 was a bug report that I
> filed on the missing plugin headers.
>
> That is now resolved - the headers are installed. I've closed the bug report.
>
> However I'm not sure how my application / buildsystem is meant to fi
