> On Jan 14, 2020, at 8:49 AM, Kamil Rytarowski <n...@gmx.com> wrote:
>
> On 10.01.2020 17:11, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> On 07/01/20 12:44 -0800, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jan 7, 2020, at 7:43 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For Jason and Krister's benefit, that last comment was referring to
>>>> an earlier suggestion to not try to support old NetBSD releases, see
>>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2020-01/msg00026.html
>>>>
>>>>> I think we need the netbsd target maintainers (CC'd) to decide whether
>>>>> GCC should still support older releases or drop that support for GCC
>>>>> 10. Usually I'd say we need a period of deprecation, but if GCC
>>>>> doesn't currently build on NetBSD then maybe that's unnecessary.
>>>
>>> The affected NetBSD versions are NetBSD 6 and earlier, which are EOL
>>> from the NetBSD perspective, so I think this is OK.
>>
>> So is this patch OK then?
>>
>
> Looks good to me.
Now that we have Kamil's confirmation that it's working for him, it also gets a
thumbs-up from me.
Thanks!
>
>> Could somebody please test it on NetBSD? (Ideally on the oldest
>> supported release, but anything is better than nothing).
>>
>
> Works for me on:
>
> $ uname -a
> NetBSD chieftec 9.99.37 NetBSD 9.99.37 (GENERIC) #5: Mon Jan 13 15:39:58
> CET 2020
> root@chieftec:/public/netbsd-root/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC amd64
>
> I see no reason why would it break on older releases, but I don't have
> them handy for tests.
>
>> This differs from the patches posted by using _CTYPE_BL for the
>> isblank class, which seems better than using _CTYPE_S.
>>
>>
>
> _CTYPE_BL is the right bit for isblank().
>
-- thorpej
