This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed)
- To: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>
- Subject: Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed)
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: 01 Aug 2001 00:24:35 +0200
- Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>, Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <200107312215.SAA28416@makai.watson.ibm.com>
David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com> writes:
| >>>>> Gabriel Dos Reis writes:
|
| Gabriel> OK. I'm convinced that you have a working solution for 3.0.x (and
| Gabriel> maybe 3.1 if can't advance with Stephen's idea).
|
| Gabriel> Any objection?
|
| Gabriel> | I do not yet have a good idea
| Gabriel> | of how or where to have only gen-num-limits care about 32x64.
|
| Gabriel> Nearly everything:
|
| I was not referring to the methods affected by 32 vs 64. What I
| meant was other than testing for gen-num-limits failure with my original
| patch, I don't know how or where to tie in knowledge that we are building
| on a 32x64 and should pretend as if we are cross-compiling *ONLY* for
| gen-num-limits.
Ah OK, I misunderstood you. Sorry.
| My question is: assuming we can know that we are performing 32x64
| (BIG IF), what do you want configure/Make to do instead of failing and
| re-trying?
Hmm, I was under the impression that we wanted to fake and copy generic
std_limits.h, no? Or am I still being dense?
-- Gaby