http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
--- Comment #9 from Dave Korn <davek at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-09 21:35:09
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> > How about if we make building the plugin conditional on having c99
> > available?
>
> That wouldn't be consistent with us currently requiring only a C90 compiler to
> build GCC. Can't the code be rewritten in C90 instead?
The prerequisites page does say:
" ISO C90 compiler
Necessary to bootstrap GCC, although versions of GCC prior to 3.4 also
allow bootstrapping with a traditional (K&R) C compiler.
To build all languages in a cross-compiler or other configuration where
3-stage bootstrap is not performed, you need to start with an existing GCC
binary (version 2.95 or later) because source code for language frontends other
than C might use GCC extensions. "
We could just say that lto-plugin comes under the same rule as the non-C FEs.
However I'll look at porting it. I guess we can break up the 64-bit hex
printf into two 32-bit ones.
