This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [GNU] [SuperH] [M32R] limits.h issue


On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 05:58:05 +0100
	Ralf Corsepius <ralf_corsepius@rtems.org> wrote:
 > For RTEMS, we are facing the same issue and are working around it by
 > overriding LIMITS_H_TEST = true in config/t-rtems.
 > 
 > cf. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18643

Thanks for the reference.

 > > The problem is (I think):
 > > 	When building cross GCC, it assumes that the header files are
 > > 	placed at $(gcc_tooldir)/sys-include.  It is true for non-GNU
 > > 	system, but for GNU system where we use GNU C library as
 > > 	native library, it's $(gcc_tooldir)/include instead.
 > Not quite. There exist other systems but GlibC-based systems, to whom
 > the same assumption applies, e.g. newlib based systems.

You're right.  My description is not quite right, as I only looked at
GNU system.

Today, together with Kaz, I've examined two my concerns:

	What is $(gcc_tooldir)/sys-include?
	Why does LIMITS_H_TEST checks $(gcc_tooldir)/sys-include?

I think that it's the wreckage of the feature, --with-headers.

I think that in the days of GNUPro by Cygnus, with --with-headers and
--with-libs, people used to copy system headers to
$(tooldir)/sys-include and system libraries to $(tooldir)/lib.

These features are deprecated.

So, I think that it doesn't make sense to check
$(gcc_tooldir)/sys-include.

We should check $(gcc_tooldir)/include for limits.h for all systems
(not only for GNU/Linux and RTEMS and others).

How do you think?
-- 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]