Hi! On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 01:29:57PM +0200, Spiro Trikaliotis wrote: > Thus, it seems rule #1 was added in 2.13.9 compared to 2.13.3 (or was > the order of #1 and #2 changed?). Wouldn't it make more sense to > completely remove rule #2 then? This way, it would seem more consistent > to me. Yes, you might be right here. I will check that. > Additionally, #2 can be added by the user simply by adding "-I ./" on > the command-line, so I do not see so much sense to have that rule there. This was probably because I didn't want to break the old behaviour completely. > Even worse, even --forget-inc-paths does not change anything on #1 and > #2, only on #3. So, one cannot prevent rule #2 from happening. --forget-inc-paths will only remove the compiled-in paths; nothing that is added later. > BTW: Will you document this change for 2.14? ;) If I don't forget it:-) Regards Uz -- Ullrich von Bassewitz uz@musoftware.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Mon Jul 30 12:09:36 2012
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2012-07-30 12:09:39 CEST