On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 03:48:22PM +0100, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> * Jakub Jelinek [2014-11-13 14:13:42 +0100]:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:21:21PM +0100, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> > > I had a look around and couldn't find anything helpful. The best I
> > > can offer would be the current path
* Jakub Jelinek [2014-11-13 14:13:42 +0100]:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:21:21PM +0100, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> > I had a look around and couldn't find anything helpful. The best I
> > can offer would be the current path within the llvm source code where
> > these are defined. Would that be su
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:21:21PM +0100, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> I had a look around and couldn't find anything helpful. The best I
> can offer would be the current path within the llvm source code where
> these are defined. Would that be sufficient?
That is not useful. The point is not to sug
* Jakub Jelinek [2014-11-13 10:55:34 +0100]:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:35:28AM +0100, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> > Am I correct to think that the include/* files are owned by GCC, and
> > so the mistake here was not propagating the change to the GCC
> > repository?
>
> Yes.
>
> > 2014-11-13 Shin
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:35:28AM +0100, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> Am I correct to think that the include/* files are owned by GCC, and
> so the mistake here was not propagating the change to the GCC
> repository?
Yes.
> 2014-11-13 Shinichiro Hamaji
>
> * dwarf2.h (DW_AT_APPLE_optimized,
Some time ago there was an attempt to add the DWARF DW_AT_APPLE_*
extensions to the file include/dwarf2.def.
The original patch email is here:
https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2012-09/msg00282.html
the "patch committed" mail is here:
https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2012-10/msg00424.html
w
