Re: [Patch, libiberty] Fix build regression

[Anthony Green <green at moxielogic dot com>]

On 11/20/2010 1:21 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Anthony Green wrote on Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:09:36PM CET:
> > This patch fixes a recent libiberty build regression discussed in this
> > thread:
> >    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg01998.html
> >
> > If we know we aren't going to be able to build executables, simply emit
> > a warning saying that we can't link (instead of exiting with an error),
> > and mention that we're assuming prctl does not exist for this target.
> >
> > Ok to commit?
>
> A better fix is to actually allow the answer to the test to be correct
> even in the no-link case.  For that, cache the test result.  It may then
> be useful to move the test to a more appropriate place, such as after
> the code that sets all the cache variables based on $host in the no-link
> case.  That way port maintainers can enter the right answers for this
> test there, and if not given users can still configure toplevel with
>    .../configure target_configargs=libiberty_cv_prctl_PR_SET_NAME=yes


Thanks Ralf.  However last night on #gcc Ian questioned why this is a 
link test in the first place.  Why not just check headers instead?  I've 
attached a revised patch based on header checking.

Ok to commit?

AG

Attachment: libiberty-link-patch-2.txt
Description: Text document