Re: [PATCH,PING]] gcc/config/freebsd-spec.h: Fix building PIE

2012-08-29 Thread Alexis Ballier
he git commit message was supposed to be the ChangeLog entry (imho it is rather pointless to include it in the patch since it will most likely conflict when/if it gets applied) > > Any reviewer? > > On Tue, 8 May 2012, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > For the record, there's a s

[PATCH] gcc/config/freebsd-spec.h: Fix building PIE executables. Link them with crt{begin,end}S.o and Scrt1.o which are PIC instead of crt{begin,end}.o and crt1.o which are not. Spec synced from gnu-u

2012-05-08 Thread Alexis Ballier
gcc/config/i386/freebsd.h: Likewise. --- gcc/config/freebsd-spec.h |9 +++-- gcc/config/i386/freebsd.h |9 +++-- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/config/freebsd-spec.h b/gcc/config/freebsd-spec.h index 770a3d1..2808582 100644 --- a/gcc/config/free

Re: [PATCH] gcc/config/freebsd-spec.h: Fix building PIE executables. Link them with crt{begin,end}S.o and Scrt1.o which are PIC instead of crt{begin,end}.o and crt1.o which are not. Spec synced from g

2012-05-08 Thread Alexis Ballier
For the record, there's a similar logic in FreeBSD's gcc: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/contrib/gcc/config/freebsd-spec.h?revision=200038&view=markup Regards, Alexis.

Re: [PATCH] gcc/config/freebsd-spec.h: Fix building PIE executables. Link them with crt{begin,end}S.o and Scrt1.o which are PIC instead of crt{begin,end}.o and crt1.o which are not. Spec synced from g

2012-05-09 Thread Alexis Ballier
Hmm, sorry, it seems I forgot to look at MAINTAINERS and CC him... On Tue, 8 May 2012 09:53:43 -0400 Alexis Ballier wrote: > gcc/config/i386/freebsd.h: Likewise. > --- > gcc/config/freebsd-spec.h |9 +++-- > gcc/config/i386/freebsd.h |9 +++-- > 2 files change

Re: [PATCH] gcc/config/freebsd-spec.h: Fix building PIE executables. Link them with crt{begin,end}S.o and Scrt1.o which are PIC instead of crt{begin,end}.o and crt1.o which are not. Spec synced from g

2012-06-05 Thread Alexis Ballier
ping ? is there any problem with that patch ?