This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Don't use slowcompare method unconditionally
- From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- To: jakub at redhat dot com
- Cc: kelley dot cook at sbcglobal dot net (Kelley Cook), gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu (Andrew Pinski)
- Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:54:22 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't use slowcompare method unconditionally
>
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 08:31:03AM -0800, Kelley Cook wrote:
> > > I don't think so. I'm using coreutils-5.93, release apparently 3
> > days
> > > ago, and it refuses tail +NNN form by default.
> > > Of course I can use "_POSIX2_VERSION=199506 tail +16c" instead of
> > just
> > > tail +16c and it will work, but that doesn't sound to me like
> > "coreutils
> > > has already been fixed".
> >
> > So wouldn't defining a POSIX_TAIL="_POSIX2_VERSION=199506 tail" and
> > using then using $(POSIX_TAIL) +16c be a more complete idea for bith
> > broken and non-broken coreutils?
>
> No. GNU coreutils tail dosn't need to be the only tail that follows
> POSIX 2001 spec. _POSIX2_VERSION env variable is just GNU coreutils
> feature, the standard only talks about _POSIX2_VERSION macro.
Please read the old threads on GCC about this issue.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-01/msg00274.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2003-05/msg01034.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-08/msg01550.html
All of them reject we should change this and say that this is a coreutils
bug still.
-- Pinski