On May 25, 2012, at 17:17 , Michael Matz wrote:
>> This should have been fixed by rev 187839
...
> Super, yes, that works.
Great :)
> Though I still wonder if the whole copy-over-to-gcc business shouldn't be
> dependend on anything newly built. I can't see the use in copying
> over the same u
Hi,
On Fri, 25 May 2012, Olivier Hainque wrote:
> > I've noticed that libitm is always rebuild with a non-bootstrap tree even
> > with merely a sequence of two makes. The reason turns out to be that
> > installation of unwind.h from libgcc, which is always done with a simple
> > make:
>
> Th
Hello Michael,
On May 25, 2012, at 16:30 , Michael Matz wrote:
> I've noticed that libitm is always rebuild with a non-bootstrap tree even
> with merely a sequence of two makes. The reason turns out to be that
> installation of unwind.h from libgcc, which is always done with a simple
> make:
Hi,
I've noticed that libitm is always rebuild with a non-bootstrap tree even
with merely a sequence of two makes. The reason turns out to be that
installation of unwind.h from libgcc, which is always done with a simple
make:
# make
# make -d
...
dest=../.././gcc/include/tmp$$-unwind.h; \
