This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: Make sure symbol version script is writeable
- From: Jim Blandy <jimb at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 18:01:22 -0700
- Subject: Re: Make sure symbol version script is writeable
- References: <m364741gqm.fsf@codesourcery.com> <jetzuonuix.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> writes:
> Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com> writes:
>
>> If the source tree has been made read-only, the libstdc++-v3 build
>> dies trying to construct src/libstdc++-symbols.ver.
>>
>> libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>> 2007-05-07 Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com>
>>
>> * libstdc++-v3/src/Makefile.am (libstdc++-symbol.ver): Make
>> sure the build tree copy of libstdc++-symbol.ver is writeable.
>> * libstdc++-v3/src/Makefile.in: Regenerated.
>>
>> Index: libstdc++-v3/src/Makefile.am
>> ===================================================================
>> --- libstdc++-v3/src/Makefile.am (revision 124502)
>> +++ libstdc++-v3/src/Makefile.am (working copy)
>> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
>> libstdc++-symbols.ver: ${glibcxx_srcdir}/$(SYMVER_FILE) \
>> $(port_specific_symbol_files)
>> cp ${glibcxx_srcdir}/$(SYMVER_FILE) ./libstdc++-symbols.ver
>> + chmod +w ./libstdc++-symbol.ver
>
> You surely mean `symbols' here?
Yes, I certainly do. Thanks for the close reading. (This is what I
get for working with three branches at once, none of whose patches
apply cleanly to the others.)