From http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-06/msg00595.html /work/rearnsha/gnu/gcc/trunk/./gcc/xgcc -B/work/rearnsha/gnu/gcc/trunk/./gcc/ -B/work/rearnsha/gnu/testinstall/arm-netbsdelf2/bin/ -B/work/rearnsha/gnu/testinstall/arm-netbsdelf2/lib/ -isystem /work/rearnsha/gnu/testinstall/arm-netbsdelf2/include -isystem /work/rearnsha/gnu/testinstall/arm-netbsdelf2/sys-include -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc/trunk/libgomp -I. -I/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc/trunk/libgomp/config/posix -I/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc/trunk/libgomp -Wall -pthread -Werror -O2 -g -O2 -MT env.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/env.Tpo -c /home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc/trunk/libgomp/env.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/env.o /home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc/trunk/libgomp/env.c: In function 'initialize_env': /home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc/trunk/libgomp/env.c:172: error: 'PTHREAD_STACK_MIN' undeclared (first use in this function) IIRC libjava had the same problem at one point, so presumably the same fix will apply here.
Also read http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-06/msg00494.html Where I mentioned this should not have been applied.
libgomp is a new feature, and therefore has no "regressions" per se, and therefore any bug fix applies. The problem report from llnl can be legitimately considered a bug.
Subject: Bug 28008 Author: rth Date: Wed Jun 14 15:20:01 2006 New Revision: 114643 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=114643 Log: PR libgomp/28008 * env.c (initialize_env): Avoid using PTHREAD_STACK_MIN when undefined. Use GOMP_STACKSIZE not OMP_STACKSIZE for environment. Modified: trunk/libgomp/ChangeLog trunk/libgomp/env.c
Fixed.
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] build failure due to PTHREAD_STACK_MIN not being declared On Jun 14, 2006, at 8:17 AM, rth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > ------- Comment #2 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-14 > 15:17 ------- > libgomp is a new feature, and therefore has no "regressions" per se, > and therefore any bug fix applies. That does not matter. Please read Mark's email again. Would you have applied this to the branch, if no then you should not have applied the patch. Applying a patch which just fixes a bug and not a regression when the mainline is in release-branch rules is just wrong. -- Pinski
*** Bug 28033 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 28431 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***