From owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org  Fri Mar 30 08:06:20 2001
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) id IAA63310;
	Fri, 30 Mar 2001 08:06:20 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from mass.dis.org (mass.dis.org [216.240.45.41])
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA63305
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Fri, 30 Mar 2001 08:06:19 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from msmith@mass.dis.org)
Received: from mass.dis.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mass.dis.org (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f2TN6Eg02139
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Thu, 29 Mar 2001 15:06:15 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from msmith@mass.dis.org)
Message-Id: <200103292306.f2TN6Eg02139@mass.dis.org>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999
To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 29 Mar 2001 11:01:17 PST."
             <4148FEAAD879D311AC5700A0C969E8905DE7DB@orsmsx35.jf.intel.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 15:06:14 -0800
From: Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org>
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Precedence: list
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+010328
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 1119
Subject: [acpi-jp 1119] Re: acpica-unix-20010313.tar.gz 
Errors-To: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
X-Originator: msmith@freebsd.org

> OK, I'm confused, because I've tried this on a 5.0-CURRENT box (gcc 2.95.3)
> in a test program and it worked fine. It also works on Redhat 6.2 (gcc 2.91)
> and MSVC's docs explicitly mention that the current directory is the file
> containing the #include. Various C books I consulted were not helpful.

No, you're right, and I don't know what I was smoking. 

The problem shows up using mkdep:

In file included from ../../contrib/dev/acpica/components/include/acpi.h:126,
                 from ../../dev/acpica/Osd/OsdSynch.c:34:
../../contrib/dev/acpica/components/include/platform/acenv.h:209: acfreebsd.h: No such file or directory
mkdep: compile failed

which I understood to just invoke the C preprocessor directly, and indeed 
when you aim it at a trivial test case, it works just fine.  It looks 
like the fact that we pass -I- to the preprocssor is the problem, in that 
it breaks this handling. 

Sorry for the false alarm; pass me the pointy hat and I'll go spank our
tools people instead. 8)

Regards,
Mike


-- 
... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his
rivals and unfortunately opponents also.  But not because people want
to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force
people to take different points of view.  [Dr. Fritz Todt]
           V I C T O R Y   N O T   V E N G E A N C E


