DJ Delorie wrote: > No, we've always hard-coded what newlib does to avoid the link > problems. I think we should continue with that for now. > > I suspect we need to AC_DEFINE(HAVE_PSIGNAL)
Corinna Vinschen had the same suggestion: > Sorry about that. I guess that should have been something along the > lines of > > AC_DEFINE(HAVE_PSIGNAL,1,[Define if you have psignal]) Just so I understand correctly: adding this AC_DEFINE would *always* define HAVE_PSIGNAL when configuring libiberty with --with-newlib, and thus libiberty would never export psignal. This would of course be fine when building against current newlib head, because that does provide psignal. However, when building against some older newlib version, we still wouldn't get psignal from libiberty, and therefore not have it available at all, right? [ Maybe this would be just fine. GCC for example never calls psignal anyway ... ] If we do add AC_DEFINE(psignal), shouldn't we then also add AC_DEFINE(strsignal), since this is also provided by newlib (and having strsignal from libiberty but psignal from newlib, using two potentially different lists of signal names, would seem to be just wierd ...)? Thanks, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE ulrich.weig...@de.ibm.com
