Hi Bruno,
> On 23 Jun 2022, at 05:24, Bruno Haible wrote:
>
> Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> … although now I see some configure warnings about not being able to access
>> build-aux (which I do not recall seeing with the previous hack - but that
>> could be just bad memory ;) )
>
> You can get warnin
On 2022-06-22, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:52 PM m wrote:
Hello!
I maintain a fork of GCC which adds support for my custom CPU ISA,
MRISC32 (the machine description can be found here:
https://github.com/mrisc32/gcc-mrisc32/tree/mbitsnbites/mrisc32/gcc/config/mrisc32
).
Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Yes (
> # We can use an in-tree build of libintl.
> if test -f ifelse([$1],,[../gettext-runtime],[$1])/uninstalled-config.sh;
> then
>
> relative_builddir='ifelse([$1],,[${top_builddir}/..],[$1]/..)/gettext-runtime'
> . ifelse([$1],,[../gettext-runtime],[$1])/uninstalle
--
Hello from LinkedIn,
Is your email still active?
Hi Bruno,
+1 on the C reasons for removing intl.
(however, once we have a rough working patch, it would still need buy-in from
GDB + binutils)
> On 21 Jun 2022, at 03:05, Bruno Haible wrote:
>> So, indeed, part of this is quite straight forward - we can amend the
>> Makefile.def
>> to specify
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:52 PM m wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> I maintain a fork of GCC which adds support for my custom CPU ISA,
> MRISC32 (the machine description can be found here:
> https://github.com/mrisc32/gcc-mrisc32/tree/mbitsnbites/mrisc32/gcc/config/mrisc32
> ).
>
> I recently discovered that
On Wed, 2022-06-22 at 16:57 +0200, Tim Lange wrote:
> The checker reaches region-model.cc#3083 in my patch with the
> impl_region_model_context
> on the 'after' node of create_buffer() but then discards the warning
> inside
> impl_region_model_context::warn because m_stmt is null. Even if m_stmt
The checker reaches region-model.cc#3083 in my patch with the
impl_region_model_context
on the 'after' node of create_buffer() but then discards the warning inside
impl_region_model_context::warn because m_stmt is null. Even if m_stmt were
not be NULL at the 'after' node, my warning would be emit
