Greg Schafer wrote:
The issue is now filed as
http://gcc.gnu.org/PR35532
It would be appreciated if the responsible Codesourcery folks could address
this regression.
I will definitely look into this. (I was on vacation last week and I've
been sick this week, so I haven't had a chance yet,
On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 01:17:02PM -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> Greg Schafer wrote:
> >Hi Carlos and Mark,
> >
> >Your "Relocated compiler should not look in $prefix" patch here:
> >
> >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-10/msg00280.html
> >
> >appears to have caused a regression in my GCC 4.3 testi
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 08:11:30AM -0500, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Mar 2008, Greg Schafer wrote:
> > Hi Carlos and Mark,
> >
> > Your "Relocated compiler should not look in $prefix" patch here:
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-10/msg00280.html
> >
> > appears to have caused a reg
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> cutnpasting commands from the dejagnu .log files don't work;
> there's some environment variable (more than just
> GCC_EXEC_PREFIX, AFAICT).
Wrong; I just missed the terminating / as in
env GCC_EXEC_PREFIX=/home/hp/crisprefix/lib/gcc/
(Should be dump
On Sun, 2 Mar 2008, Greg Schafer wrote:
> Hi Carlos and Mark,
>
> Your "Relocated compiler should not look in $prefix" patch here:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-10/msg00280.html
>
> appears to have caused a regression in my GCC 4.3 testing.
So *now* I know why my cross-test setup to (non-sysr
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 09:29:18AM +1100, Greg Schafer wrote:
> The following patch restores the old behaviour and fixes my build.
I for one would not like to see us go back to the old broken
behaviour. One rather nice result of Carlos' fix is that you can now
build a sysrooted compiler on a nati
On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 01:17:02PM -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> Greg Schafer wrote:
> >Hi Carlos and Mark,
> >
> >Your "Relocated compiler should not look in $prefix" patch here:
> >
> >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-10/msg00280.html
> >
> >appears to have caused a regression in my GCC 4.3 testi
Greg Schafer wrote:
Hi Carlos and Mark,
Your "Relocated compiler should not look in $prefix" patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-10/msg00280.html
appears to have caused a regression in my GCC 4.3 testing.
In summary, there is a small window *during the GCC build itself* where GCC
does
Hi Carlos and Mark,
Your "Relocated compiler should not look in $prefix" patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-10/msg00280.html
appears to have caused a regression in my GCC 4.3 testing.
In summary, there is a small window *during the GCC build itself* where GCC
does not pick up the correc
