On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 11:02:39AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 9:54 AM Iain Sandoe <iains....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Currently, we misconfigure GCC on POSIX platforms that require the
> > inclusion of <libgen.h> to declare 'basename()'.
> >
> > The series here does the following:
> > - ensures that the libiberty configure caters for platforms that need
> > <libgen.h> (it does not alter the outcome on those that also have
> > basename() in libc). [PR119218]
> > - ensures that the gcc/ configure matches the behaviour of
> > libiberty [PS119250]
> > - switches the remaining two uses of host 'basename()' to use the
> > libiberty 'lbasename()'.
> >
> > Despite the last change, the first two are still needed to allow the
> > inclusion of <libgen.h> in GCC sources (otherwise the host definition
> > clashes with the libiberty one).
> >
> > At some stage (not proposed in this patch series) perhaps we should
> > just poison the host basename/dirname and require use of the libiberty
> > replacements.
> >
> > All tested on x86_64-linux, darwin, aarch64-linux, darwin.
> > OK for trunk? (when?)
>
> This looks all reasonable, so OK from my side, even now. Do you
> agree, Jakub?
Yes.
Jakub
