Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 20:49:12 +0100 From: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@FreeBSD.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Dag-Erling =?UTF-8?B?U23DuHJncmF2?= <des@des.no>, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: manpath change for ports ? Message-ID: <20170308204912.5cfd861d@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfqn53iitjOK1B3RuFFnpn5U-6Vs_L=HP%2BxrAaXXutW=tw@mail.gmail.com> References: <20170306235610.cmpxk27jhoafel6l@ivaldir.net> <86mvcvojzt.fsf@desk.des.no> <20170308182124.79c4bc13@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <CANCZdfqn53iitjOK1B3RuFFnpn5U-6Vs_L=HP%2BxrAaXXutW=tw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 8 Mar 2017 10:31:32 -0700 Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Tijl Coosemans <tijl@freebsd.org> wrote: >> Are you talking about gcc implicitly searching /usr/local/include and >> /usr/local/lib? > > That's currently inconsistent between base gcc, clang, binutils and > ports versions. I forget which ones do and which ones don't search > automatically. It's only ports binutils and ports gcc that search /usr/local. > IMHO, they all should. I used to think this too, but now I think it should be possible to use any compiler to compile something from base or something that should only depend on things from base, for testing purposes or perhaps because it needs to be deployed on some other machine. Compilers shouldn't search /usr/local implicitly then. It's easy enough to add -I and -L flags (perhaps using pkg-config) but it's not easy to remove built-in -I and -L flags.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170308204912.5cfd861d>