Ping. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg02208.html
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Jing Yu <jin...@google.com> wrote: > Based on discussion on another thread > (http://www.mail-archive.com/gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org/msg06627.html), > what Joseph recommended was ripping out all support for building > libiberty for the target side as it is not needed. Thus I doubt > skipping target-libiberty for all targets is acceptable. > I don't have the bandwidth to work on the ideal patch. Thus I am > wondering if we can skip target-libiberty for androideabi target > before the ideal patch is out. > > Thanks, > Jing > > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Ye Joey <joey.ye...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 5:42 AM, Jing Yu <jin...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>> Building gcc-4.6 arm android toolchain fails because of an >>> incompatible function definition between libiberty and bionic. >>> >>> Thanking Joseph, I have learned that "there's no such thing as a >>> target libiberty" and we should rip all the target-libiberty rules >>> out. I don't know if someone is working on it. Before that patch comes >>> out, can we add arm*-*-linux-androideabi to the list of targets where >>> target-libiberty is skipped? >>> >> How about skip libiberty for all targets then? >> >> - Joey >
