Re: coreutils 7.1.49-ebb9 FTB risc/HP-UX

[Matthew Woehlke]

Jim Meyering wrote:
> Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> > Jim Meyering wrote:
> > > If someone cares enough about HP's C compiler, they teach
> > > autoconf to detect this limitation and automatically add an
> > > appropriate -H option, presumably to raise its internal limit.
> > I'd love to help, but as mentioned, I have *no* idea how to feed
> > options to cc so that it passes them to cpp.
>
> For you to get past this, try ./configure CPPFLAGS=-H...
> where you choose the "..." part.

I finally found this in the cc manpage (it's mis-formated and 
near-impossible to read; I missed it the first several times). Looks 
like it needs '-Wp,-H,1048576'. No I didn't write that wrong, the macro 
apparently expands to *over 180 kb*, and I'd like room to add one or two 
items. (I decided to verify that with 'gcc -E'... and yup, it's around 
200 kb. *Still* don't think that's excessive?)

Incidentally, this construct, which should produce the same result:

MAX (
 MAX (
  MAX (
   O_APPEND,
   MAX (O_BINARY, O_CIO)
  ),
  MAX (
   MAX (O_DIRECT, O_DIRECTORY),
   MAX (O_DSYNC, O_NOATIME)
  )
 ),
 MAX (
  MAX (
   O_NOCTTY,
   MAX (O_NOFOLLOW, O_NOLINKS)
  ),
  MAX (
   MAX (O_NONBLOCK, O_SYNC),
   MAX (O_TEXT, 0)
  )
 )
)

...expands to a measly 2 kb.

> > /usr/include/wchar.h:54: warning: `WEOF' redefined
> > wchar.h:114: warning: this is the location of the previous definition
> > In file included from acl.h:20,
>
> Ok.  let's not go there ;-)

I'm just posting the full output :-). I agree this doesn't need to be 
chased; apologies if I implied otherwise.

--
Matthew
Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.
--
"Two IIRC's must make a right" -- Larry Hall (paraphrased)