Hello, and Ping for this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-12/msg01552.html note however, that cross-building is probably broken anyway in the moment by r205690, Thanks Bernd. > there is a small problem with SSIZE_MAX, because it is not always > defined, especially not in gcc/glimits.h, which seems to be the fall-back > if the target fails to have a working limits.h. > > When I create a cross-compiler for --target=arm-linux-gnueabihf, the > working limits.h is overwritten by fix-includes with a copy of gcc/glimits.h. > Probably because it is not possible to compile the target headers with the > build > compiler and produce meaningful test results. > > However because gcc/glimits.h does not define SSIZE_MAX the following build > fails with > > In file included from ../../gcc-4.9-20131215/gcc/config/host-linux.c:21:0: > ../../gcc-4.9-20131215/gcc/config/host-linux.c: In function 'int > linux_gt_pch_use_address(void*, size_t, int, size_t)': > ../../gcc-4.9-20131215/gcc/config/host-linux.c:215:43: error: 'SSIZE_MAX' was > not declared in this scope > nbytes = read (fd, base, MIN (size, SSIZE_MAX)); > ^ > ../../gcc-4.9-20131215/gcc/system.h:351:26: note: in definition of macro 'MIN' > #define MIN(X,Y) ((X) < (Y) ? (X) : (Y)) > ^ > > > The most simple way to fix this would be to not use SSIZE_MAX > here. > > Boot-Strapped and regression-tested on X86_64. > Plus cross-build for arm-linux-gnueabihf. > > Ok for trunk? > > > Thanks > Bernd.