This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [RFC] Do we care about binary compatibility of code produced by cross-compilers?
- From: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
- To: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
- Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>, libstdc++ <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:57:20 +0200
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Do we care about binary compatibility of code produced by cross-compilers?
- References: <48A05898.9000705@oracle.com> <m37iane6sw.fsf@google.com> <48B160E6.3040908@oracle.com> <m3prnyksyx.fsf@google.com> <48B1DA23.2060404@oracle.com> <m3hc99lgsx.fsf@google.com> <48B2855E.5090907@oracle.com> <m38wulkkuh.fsf@google.com> <48B2FCDC.7080101@oracle.com> <48B30F10.70100@oracle.com> <48B31507.7040007@oracle.com> <m3zln0kdn3.fsf@google.com> <48BBD5F8.2040808@oracle.com> <48BC0DEA.2040908@codesourcery.com> <48BC1122.4080101@oracle.com> <48BCD0F7.8080208@gnu.org> <48BD0A8A.5080102@oracle.com> <48BD1059.8080102@gnu.org>
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
... actually, if all the checks presently doing link-tests consistently
get a parameter allowing to disable the test completely and also to set
its value, I'm thinking with proper documentation nobody could be
*really* unhappy with the change... Do you agree?
The cache file is a way to set the value of a test.
Sorry, but I'm not sure to understand how your sentence relates to my
question. Can you expand a bit about that? To be more clear on my side,
besides the first two or three sentences of my previous message, I left
the issue about running GCC_CHECK_TLS alone. In the sentences above I
was just describing the effect of moving checks possibly doing
link-tests to the set of tests run unconditionally, thus even when
non-native,
*and* at the same time making sure that all those tests can be run with
three possible arguments (the usual ones): yes, no, auto.
Is that a kind of setup which we would find better than the current one,
with tests possibly doing link-tests run only when native and
hard-coding for crosses? Any objections / willingness to help to the
idea of changing GCC_CHECK_UNWIND_GETIPINFO and AM_ICONV (-> GCC_ICONV)
consistently with above?
Paolo.