All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* include/ and -I
@ 2012-11-02 21:14 Dan Mick
  2012-11-02 23:35 ` Dan Mick
  2012-11-03 19:01 ` Sage Weil
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dan Mick @ 2012-11-02 21:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: ceph-devel

I was somewhat surprised to note that we don't build with -I include, so 
that files that userland programs would find with 
relative-to-/usr/include paths have to be modified for building in the tree.

Was this conscious, or does anyone else think it would be smoother to
-I include/ so that outside-the-tree and inside-the-tree #includes are 
more similar?

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: include/ and -I
  2012-11-02 21:14 include/ and -I Dan Mick
@ 2012-11-02 23:35 ` Dan Mick
  2012-11-03 19:01 ` Sage Weil
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dan Mick @ 2012-11-02 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: ceph-devel



On 11/02/2012 02:14 PM, Dan Mick wrote:
> I was somewhat surprised to note that we don't build with -I include, so
> that files that userland programs would find with
> relative-to-/usr/include paths have to be modified for building in the
> tree.
>
> Was this conscious, or does anyone else think it would be smoother to
> -I include/ so that outside-the-tree and inside-the-tree #includes are
> more similar?

(and Mr. Lang points out that, of course, I really mean something like
-I $(srcdir)/include, of course)

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: include/ and -I
  2012-11-02 21:14 include/ and -I Dan Mick
  2012-11-02 23:35 ` Dan Mick
@ 2012-11-03 19:01 ` Sage Weil
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Sage Weil @ 2012-11-03 19:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dan Mick; +Cc: ceph-devel

On Fri, 2 Nov 2012, Dan Mick wrote:
> I was somewhat surprised to note that we don't build with -I include, so that
> files that userland programs would find with relative-to-/usr/include paths
> have to be modified for building in the tree.
> 
> Was this conscious, or does anyone else think it would be smoother to
> -I include/ so that outside-the-tree and inside-the-tree #includes are more
> similar?

This was not deliberate.  However, we should be careful that our include/ 
files don't mask ones in /usr/include (e.g., types.h).

sage> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2012-11-03 19:01 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-11-02 21:14 include/ and -I Dan Mick
2012-11-02 23:35 ` Dan Mick
2012-11-03 19:01 ` Sage Weil

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.