[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #17 from tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-23 18:53 --- (In reply to comment #16) > Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' > undeclared > > I'll try to get around it as soon as I can. Thanks. It has been a month... would be nice if you could look at it soon. -- tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-08-23 18:53:11 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #18 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-08-24 18:05 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared > I'll try to get around it as soon as I can. Thanks. It has been a month... would be nice if you could look at it soon. Thanks for poking, I got stuck on a strange bug that causes make to assert while building the Java bits and I haven't gotten around to fixing it. I'll try and get around to atleast fixing this bug ASAP; which may take some time. :( Is there a hurry getting this in, I could try and reprioritise my tasks if it is urgent. Happy hacking, and thanks. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|bootstrap |target Keywords||build Summary|GNU Hurd bootstrap error: |[4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd |'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared |bootstrap error: ||'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-20 17:50 --- Why is GNU target including linux.h header at all? TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS should be overridden in gnu.h anyways. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #2 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-15 13:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=11892)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11892&action=view)
Fixes #28102
(In reply to comment #1)
> Why is GNU target including linux.h header at all?
> TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS should be overridden in gnu.h anyways.
Because the rules in config.gcc say so:
*-*-gnu*)
...
i[34567]86-*-*)
tm_file="${cpu_type}/${cpu_type}.h i386/unix.h i386/att.h dbxelf.h
elfos.\
h svr4.h linux.h i386/linux.h gnu.h ${tm_file}"
...
Here is a patch that fixes the problem.
gcc/ChangeLog
2006-07-15 Alfred M. Szmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* config/i386/gnu.h (TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS): Undefine macro.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2006-07-15 14:56 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared On Jul 15, 2006, at 10:45 PM, ams at gnu dot org wrote: > Because the rules in config.gcc say so: And that is not why, but that is what is causing linux.h being included? Again why is Linux.h being included? -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #4 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-15 15:17 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared > Because the rules in config.gcc say so: And that is not why, but that is what is causing linux.h being included? Again why is Linux.h being included? GNU and GNU/Linux are similar enough not to warrant duplication of the code from linux.h in gnu.h. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-07-15 15:27
---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC'
undeclared
On Jul 16, 2006, at 12:17 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote:
> GNU and GNU/Linux are similar enough not to warrant duplication of the
> code from linux.h in gnu.h.
Depends, the duplication is small anyways as linux.h is only 129 lines
(including copyright and comments).
In fact it is way wrong now anyways as there is no uclibc for hurd.
So the duplication factor should not matter as there is hardly any
duplication.
Only the following code will be duplicated which is hardly any after
all:
/* Don't assume anything about the header files. */
#define NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C
#undef ASM_APP_ON
#define ASM_APP_ON "#APP\n"
#undef ASM_APP_OFF
#define ASM_APP_OFF "#NO_APP\n"
#undef MD_EXEC_PREFIX
#undef MD_STARTFILE_PREFIX
#undef STARTFILE_SPEC
#if defined HAVE_LD_PIE
#define STARTFILE_SPEC \
"%{!shared: %{pg|p|profile:gcrt1.o%s;pie:Scrt1.o%s;:crt1.o%s}} \
crti.o%s %{static:crtbeginT.o%s;shared|pie:crtbeginS.o%
s;:crtbegin.o%s}"
#else
#define STARTFILE_SPEC \
"%{!shared: %{pg|p|profile:gcrt1.o%s;:crt1.o%s}} \
crti.o%s %{static:crtbeginT.o%s;shared|pie:crtbeginS.o%
s;:crtbegin.o%s}"
#endif
#undef ENDFILE_SPEC
#define ENDFILE_SPEC \
"%{shared|pie:crtendS.o%s;:crtend.o%s} crtn.o%s"
#ifndef CC1_SPEC
#define CC1_SPEC "%{profile:-p}"
#endif
#undef CPLUSPLUS_CPP_SPEC
#define CPLUSPLUS_CPP_SPEC "-D_GNU_SOURCE %(cpp)"
#if defined(HAVE_LD_EH_FRAME_HDR)
#define LINK_EH_SPEC "%{!static:--eh-frame-hdr} "
#endif
/* Define this so we can compile MS code for use with WINE. */
#define HANDLE_PRAGMA_PACK_PUSH_POP
#define LINK_GCC_C_SEQUENCE_SPEC \
"%{static:--start-group} %G %L %{static:--end-group}%{!static:%G}"
/* Use --as-needed -lgcc_s for eh support. */
#ifdef HAVE_LD_AS_NEEDED
#define USE_LD_AS_NEEDED 1
#endif
#define TARGET_POSIX_IO
-- Pinski
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #6 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-15 15:45 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC'
undeclared
Only the following code will be duplicated which is hardly any
after all:
That is from [gcc]/gcc/config/linux.h, I'm talking about
[gcc]/gcc/config/i386/{linux,gnu}.h. Which is also the one causing
problems without the patch I sent.
I don't want/have time/etc to worry about this right now, it isn't a
very high priority thing anyway. I also don't think it is a very good
idea to copy the content form */linux.h into */gnu.h...
FYI, GNU/k*BSD also uses the GNU/Linux headers, and it doesn't support
uclibc AFAIK.
Cheers.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-07-15 15:58
---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC'
undeclared
On Jul 16, 2006, at 12:45 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote:
> That is from [gcc]/gcc/config/linux.h, I'm talking about
> [gcc]/gcc/config/i386/{linux,gnu}.h. Which is also the one causing
> problems without the patch I sent.
bzzz, wrong. TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS is not defined anywhere in
config/i386/linux.h, it is defined in config/linux.h. Also
powerpc-gnu and alpha-gnu are going to have the same issue.
powerpc-gnu is worse though.
Please try again at actually looking into this issue.
It is obviously you did not look into that much.
Also kBSD is incorrect anyways and should be fixed in the same
matter but that is a different bug.
-- Pinski
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #8 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-15 16:07 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared Can you please just apply the patch and close the bug? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-07-15 16:10 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:07 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote: > Can you please just apply the patch and close the bug? Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-07-15 16:14 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:10 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect. Oh did I forget (again) to say you really should be posting patches to the gcc-patches mailing list. If you want them be included. And I still say the patch is incorrect. I already explained why I thought it was incorrect as linux.h should not be included. Also the comment in your patch is incorrect as the definition comes from config/linux.h and not from config/i386/linux.h. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #11 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-15 16:25 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared > Can you please just apply the patch and close the bug? Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect. The patch is correct, that you think that the code we use from */linux.h should be in */gnu.h is not related to this bug. This is the setup we have used for almost 10 years, and I see no reason to change it. The setup works, it minimises the workload on both parties, and it is clean. If you don't want to commit the patch then that is fine, it isn't like GCC can even compile on the GNU system due to the other bugs with patches being neglected (mostly by me). Happy hacking. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #12 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-15 16:27 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared Oh did I forget (again) to say you really should be posting patches to the gcc-patches mailing list. Thanks. I'm actually quite aware of that. I haven't gotten around to cleaning it all up so that I can send it to gcc-patches@ in one go. Also the comment in your patch is incorrect as the definition comes from config/linux.h and not from config/i386/linux.h. Thanks. I confused it with config/alpha/linux which defines TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS. Cheers. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-07-15 16:29 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:25 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote: > The patch is correct, that you think that the code we use from > */linux.h should be in */gnu.h is not related to this bug. This is > the setup we have used for almost 10 years, and I see no reason to > change it. The setup works, it minimises the workload on both > parties, and it is clean. Actually you are incorrect about not being related to this bug as it is the reason why this bug showed up and it is not clean as shown by this bug. Move along and fix/post a correct fix to the mailing list. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #14 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-15 16:55 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared I think we will have to agree to disagree on this, since neither you or I will change our minds. :-) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #15 from wieseltux23 at gmail dot com 2006-07-15 18:00 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared http://en.fon.com/ On 15 Jul 2006 16:14:34 - "pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- Comment #10 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-07-15 16:14 > --- > Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' > undeclared > > > On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:10 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > > Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect. > > Oh did I forget (again) to say you really should be posting > patches to the gcc-patches mailing list. If you want them > be included. And I still say the patch is incorrect. I already > explained why I thought it was incorrect as linux.h should not > be included. Also the comment in your patch is incorrect > as the definition comes from config/linux.h and not from > config/i386/linux.h. > > -- Pinski > > > -- > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102 > -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #16 from wieseltux23 at gmail dot com 2006-07-15 18:01 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared http://en.fon.com/ On 15 Jul 2006 16:25:10 - "ams at gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- Comment #11 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-15 16:25 --- > Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' > undeclared > >> Can you please just apply the patch and close the bug? > >Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect. > > The patch is correct, that you think that the code we use from > */linux.h should be in */gnu.h is not related to this bug. This is > the setup we have used for almost 10 years, and I see no reason to > change it. The setup works, it minimises the workload on both > parties, and it is clean. > > If you don't want to commit the patch then that is fine, it isn't like > GCC can even compile on the GNU system due to the other bugs with > patches being neglected (mostly by me). > > Happy hacking. > > > -- > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102 > -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #15 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-07-26 15:25 --- One of our (Debian's) Hurd porters has confirmed that this patch works. Alfred, can you please clean it up and submit it to gcc-patches. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
[Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
--- Comment #16 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-26 15:35 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared I'll try to get around it as soon as I can. Thanks. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102
Re: [Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
> I'll try to get around it as soon as I can. Thanks. It has been a month... would be nice if you could look at it soon. Thanks for poking, I got stuck on a strange bug that causes make to assert while building the Java bits and I haven't gotten around to fixing it. I'll try and get around to atleast fixing this bug ASAP; which may take some time. :( Is there a hurry getting this in, I could try and reprioritise my tasks if it is urgent. Happy hacking, and thanks.
Re: [Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
On Jul 15, 2006, at 10:45 PM, ams at gnu dot org wrote: Because the rules in config.gcc say so: And that is not why, but that is what is causing linux.h being included? Again why is Linux.h being included? -- Pinski
Re: [Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
On Jul 16, 2006, at 12:17 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote:
GNU and GNU/Linux are similar enough not to warrant duplication of the
code from linux.h in gnu.h.
Depends, the duplication is small anyways as linux.h is only 129 lines
(including copyright and comments).
In fact it is way wrong now anyways as there is no uclibc for hurd.
So the duplication factor should not matter as there is hardly any
duplication.
Only the following code will be duplicated which is hardly any after
all:
/* Don't assume anything about the header files. */
#define NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C
#undef ASM_APP_ON
#define ASM_APP_ON "#APP\n"
#undef ASM_APP_OFF
#define ASM_APP_OFF "#NO_APP\n"
#undef MD_EXEC_PREFIX
#undef MD_STARTFILE_PREFIX
#undef STARTFILE_SPEC
#if defined HAVE_LD_PIE
#define STARTFILE_SPEC \
"%{!shared: %{pg|p|profile:gcrt1.o%s;pie:Scrt1.o%s;:crt1.o%s}} \
crti.o%s %{static:crtbeginT.o%s;shared|pie:crtbeginS.o%
s;:crtbegin.o%s}"
#else
#define STARTFILE_SPEC \
"%{!shared: %{pg|p|profile:gcrt1.o%s;:crt1.o%s}} \
crti.o%s %{static:crtbeginT.o%s;shared|pie:crtbeginS.o%
s;:crtbegin.o%s}"
#endif
#undef ENDFILE_SPEC
#define ENDFILE_SPEC \
"%{shared|pie:crtendS.o%s;:crtend.o%s} crtn.o%s"
#ifndef CC1_SPEC
#define CC1_SPEC "%{profile:-p}"
#endif
#undef CPLUSPLUS_CPP_SPEC
#define CPLUSPLUS_CPP_SPEC "-D_GNU_SOURCE %(cpp)"
#if defined(HAVE_LD_EH_FRAME_HDR)
#define LINK_EH_SPEC "%{!static:--eh-frame-hdr} "
#endif
/* Define this so we can compile MS code for use with WINE. */
#define HANDLE_PRAGMA_PACK_PUSH_POP
#define LINK_GCC_C_SEQUENCE_SPEC \
"%{static:--start-group} %G %L %{static:--end-group}%{!static:%G}"
/* Use --as-needed -lgcc_s for eh support. */
#ifdef HAVE_LD_AS_NEEDED
#define USE_LD_AS_NEEDED 1
#endif
#define TARGET_POSIX_IO
-- Pinski
Re: [Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
On Jul 16, 2006, at 12:45 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote:
That is from [gcc]/gcc/config/linux.h, I'm talking about
[gcc]/gcc/config/i386/{linux,gnu}.h. Which is also the one causing
problems without the patch I sent.
bzzz, wrong. TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS is not defined anywhere in
config/i386/linux.h, it is defined in config/linux.h. Also
powerpc-gnu and alpha-gnu are going to have the same issue.
powerpc-gnu is worse though.
Please try again at actually looking into this issue.
It is obviously you did not look into that much.
Also kBSD is incorrect anyways and should be fixed in the same
matter but that is a different bug.
-- Pinski
Re: [Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:07 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote: Can you please just apply the patch and close the bug? Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect. -- Pinski
Re: [Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:10 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote: Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect. Oh did I forget (again) to say you really should be posting patches to the gcc-patches mailing list. If you want them be included. And I still say the patch is incorrect. I already explained why I thought it was incorrect as linux.h should not be included. Also the comment in your patch is incorrect as the definition comes from config/linux.h and not from config/i386/linux.h. -- Pinski
Re: [Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:25 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote: The patch is correct, that you think that the code we use from */linux.h should be in */gnu.h is not related to this bug. This is the setup we have used for almost 10 years, and I see no reason to change it. The setup works, it minimises the workload on both parties, and it is clean. Actually you are incorrect about not being related to this bug as it is the reason why this bug showed up and it is not clean as shown by this bug. Move along and fix/post a correct fix to the mailing list. -- Pinski
Re: [Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
http://en.fon.com/ On 15 Jul 2006 16:14:34 - "pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- Comment #10 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-07-15 16:14 > --- > Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' > undeclared > > > On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:10 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > > Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect. > > Oh did I forget (again) to say you really should be posting > patches to the gcc-patches mailing list. If you want them > be included. And I still say the patch is incorrect. I already > explained why I thought it was incorrect as linux.h should not > be included. Also the comment in your patch is incorrect > as the definition comes from config/linux.h and not from > config/i386/linux.h. > > -- Pinski > > > -- > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102 >
Re: [Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared
http://en.fon.com/ On 15 Jul 2006 16:25:10 - "ams at gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- Comment #11 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-15 16:25 --- > Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' > undeclared > >> Can you please just apply the patch and close the bug? > >Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect. > > The patch is correct, that you think that the code we use from > */linux.h should be in */gnu.h is not related to this bug. This is > the setup we have used for almost 10 years, and I see no reason to > change it. The setup works, it minimises the workload on both > parties, and it is clean. > > If you don't want to commit the patch then that is fine, it isn't like > GCC can even compile on the GNU system due to the other bugs with > patches being neglected (mostly by me). > > Happy hacking. > > > -- > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102 >
