On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 6:29 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 01:24, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> Why are you not changing the gcc_AC_ macro and instead introducing
>>> duplicate code? Perhaps the right solution is to add a final argument
>>> to the AC_RUN_IFELSE macro (don't know, I shou
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 01:24, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> Why are you not changing the gcc_AC_ macro and instead introducing
>> duplicate code? Perhaps the right solution is to add a final argument
>> to the AC_RUN_IFELSE macro (don't know, I should be on holiday and
>> hence I do not have the source code
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Why are you not changing the gcc_AC_ macro and instead introducing
> duplicate code? Perhaps the right solution is to add a final argument
> to the AC_RUN_IFELSE macro (don't know, I should be on holiday and
> hence I do not have the source c
Why are you not changing the gcc_AC_ macro and instead introducing
duplicate code? Perhaps the right solution is to add a final argument
to the AC_RUN_IFELSE macro (don't know, I should be on holiday and
hence I do not have the source code at hand :)); in any case this is
_not_ how you add tests th
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 9:49 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Target HAVE_INITFINI_ARRAY support was added by:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-11/msg00387.html
>
> Unfortunately, it checks if host supports init_array/fini_array
> sections, not target. It will generate wrong result for cross
