On Wed, 31 Mar 1999, Simon Burge wrote:

> 
> I'm tempted (as Soda suggests) to ``fix'' lint - after all, it's not
> a deficiency in the toolchain - it gets everything right.  In fact,
> the compiler *doesn't* define __mipse?__ - only MIPSE? (with various
> incantations of __ before and/or after).  So lint can be even further
> of that track.  Ug.

I think the best fix here would be one Todd suggested a while back. Have
lint stop calling cccp directly, and use ${CC} -E instead. Then if ${CC}
defines the right things, which it should, you're golden.

This solution is correcter in the long run as only the compiler really
knows what it defines, and as we're seeing, keeping lint up is cumbersome.

Also, it'd help cross compiling IMMENSLY!

Take care,

Bill