This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Removing target-libiberty (was: Re: Libiberty: POSIXify psignal definition)
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>
- Cc: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>, Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>, vinschen at redhat dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:58:41 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: Re: Removing target-libiberty (was: Re: Libiberty: POSIXify psignal definition)
- References: <20110505073039.GA23122@calimero.vinschen.de> <1305646410.29122.21.camel@e102346-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <201105171552.p4HFq4ch009720@greed.delorie.com> <1305648468.29122.25.camel@e102346-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20110517163313.GU5248@calimero.vinschen.de> <201105171648.p4HGmiOG011405@greed.delorie.com> <1305740907.29122.60.camel@e102346-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <201105181803.p4II3Yth019834@greed.delorie.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1105181919470.31331@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1106201215450.6743@dair.pair.com>
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> It seems none in approval capacity have any objection to
> (figuratively) s/target-libiberty//g in toplevel/configure.ac on
> all branches. Is an --enable-target-libiberty or
> --with-target-libiberty needed? (I'd just rather not.)
There should be no such option. It should just be a matter of removing
"target_modules = { module= libiberty; };" and everything that references
target-libiberty.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com