On 02/05/12 15:59, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 02.05.2012 16:53, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>> On 02/05/12 14:26, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> I did see gcc-4.7 fail to build for an ARM soft-float/hard-float multilib
>>> configuration. The reason is that gcc -print-multi-directory doesn't print
>>> anything for the non-default, and gcc -print-multi-lib only prints `.' (and
>>> then
>>> not building the runtime libs for the non-default). The reason is that
>>> set_multilib_dir in gcc.c only consults MULTILIB_DEFAULTS (only defined in
>>> linux-elf.h), but not configure_default_options in configargs.h. This
>>> proposed
>>> patch updates MULTILIB_DEFAULTS depending on the configure options. An
>>> alternative approach would be to update set_multilib_dir and
>>> print_multilib_info
>>> to lookup configure_default_options in configargs.h as well.
>>>
>>> Note that this didn't fail to build in gcc-4.6, but I can't see yet what
>>> change
>>> did cause the build failure.
>>>
>>> I didn't check if other targets need an update as well.
>>>
>>> Ok for the trunk?
>>>
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>
>> This patch doesn't appear to be based of FSF trunk...
>>
>>
>>> @@ -68,6 +82,28 @@
>>> "%{mfloat-abi=hard:" GLIBC_DYNAMIC_LINKER_HARD_FLOAT "} \
>>> %{!mfloat-abi=hard:" GLIBC_DYNAMIC_LINKER_SOFT_FLOAT "}"
>>>
>>
>> This pre-amble code has never existed in the FSF build.
>>
>>
>> Please ensure you are testing patches against the FSF sources, not some
>> custom variant.
>
> it was, not only on "some custom variant". The second chunk applies with fuzz
> 2, and I didn't notice when submitting.
>
So shouldn't the patch also update the setting of
GLIBC_DYNAMIC_LINKER_DEFAULT?
R.
