Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> On 07/04/16 10:30, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> > On 17/03/16 16:33, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> >> On 23/10/15 12:31, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> >>> On 10/12/2015 11:58 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>
> Index: gcc/configure.ac
> =
On 07/04/16 10:30, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> On 17/03/16 16:33, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>> On 23/10/15 12:31, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>>> On 10/12/2015 11:58 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
Index: gcc/configure.ac
===
>
On 17/03/16 16:33, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> On 23/10/15 12:31, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>> On 10/12/2015 11:58 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>>>
>>> Index: gcc/configure.ac
>>> ===
>>> --- gcc/configure.ac(revision 228530)
>>> +++ gcc
On 23/10/15 12:31, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/12/2015 11:58 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>>
>> Index: gcc/configure.ac
>> ===
>> --- gcc/configure.ac(revision 228530)
>> +++ gcc/configure.ac(working copy)
>> @@ -1993,7 +1993,7 @
On 10/12/2015 11:58 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
Index: gcc/configure.ac
===
--- gcc/configure.ac(revision 228530)
+++ gcc/configure.ac(working copy)
@@ -1993,7 +1993,7 @@ elif test "x$TARGET_SYSTEM_ROOT" != x; t
fi
if tes
> From: Ulrich Weigand
> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 11:58:40 +0200
(cutting *only* because I had a comment; not an indication of
preference.)
> --or--
>
> 2b) Change target_header_dir from a single directory to a list of
> directories, and check all of these for header files. This list
> w
Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > > So, ISTM we should change --with-headers (=yes) to either look
> > > in sys-include or in include. Setting it to sys-include
> > > wouldn't help you or anyone else as it's already the default...
> >
> > On the other hand, the current docs appear to imply that the
>
> From: Ulrich Weigand
> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 18:52:22 +0200
> Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
> > Let me ask you right back: after an installation, should
> > installation of a newer gcc *not* automatically pick up the
> > header files installed (copied to sys-include) by the previous
> > installa
Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> Let me ask you right back: after an installation, should
> installation of a newer gcc *not* automatically pick up the
> header files installed (copied to sys-include) by the previous
> installation when using the same prefix, *without* any
> --with-headers specified in
> From: Ulrich Weigand
> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 17:32:12 +0200
> Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >
> > > From: Ulrich Weigand
> > > Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:55:53 +0200
> >
> > > > Maybe make with_headers=yes (i.e. not a path) have the effect of
> > > > setting target_header_dir to include instead
Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
> > From: Ulrich Weigand
> > Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:55:53 +0200
>
> > > Maybe make with_headers=yes (i.e. not a path) have the effect of
> > > setting target_header_dir to include instead of sys-include?
>
> (...and inspect both, use the first one that works?)
So
> From: Ulrich Weigand
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:55:53 +0200
> Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
> > Sanity-check: you do have a $target_header_dir/stdio.h right?
>
> Well, no. That was the point of my original mail :-)
But you apparently have something that *would* fit.
> > Maybe make with_heade
Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> Sanity-check: you do have a $target_header_dir/stdio.h right?
Well, no. That was the point of my original mail :-)
With my initial configure line, using --with-headers, $target_header_dir
is "yes" at this point, and I don't have "yes/stdio.h".
Omitting --with-header
> From: Ulrich Weigand
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 17:25:20 +0200
> Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > > From: Ulrich Weigand
> > > Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:04:35 +0200
> >
> > > I'm using the build procedure: build initial GCC (--without-headers),
> > > use it to build newlib, install newlib into prefi
Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > From: Ulrich Weigand
> > Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:04:35 +0200
>
> > I'm using the build procedure: build initial GCC (--without-headers),
> > use it to build newlib, install newlib into prefix, build final GCC
> > (--with-headers). Using this procedure, inihibit_lib
> From: Ulrich Weigand
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:04:35 +0200
> Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
> > The directory at $target_header_dir is already inspected in
> > gcc/configure, for e.g. glibc version and stack protector
> > support, but not for setting inhibit_libc. This is just
> > inconsistent
Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> The directory at $target_header_dir is already inspected in
> gcc/configure, for e.g. glibc version and stack protector
> support, but not for setting inhibit_libc. This is just
> inconsistent and the obvious resolution to me is to inhibit
> inhibit_libc when a target
> From: Thomas Schwinge
> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 23:21:05 +0200
> Hi!
>
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 23:40:40 +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson xis.com> wrote:
> > The directory at $target_header_dir is [...]
>
> > gcc:
> > * configure.ac (target_header_dir): Move block defining
> > this to before the
Hi!
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 23:40:40 +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson
wrote:
> The directory at $target_header_dir is [...]
> gcc:
> * configure.ac (target_header_dir): Move block defining
> this to before the block setting inhibit_libc.
> (inhibit_libc): When considering $with_headers, j
19 matches
Mail list logo
