This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Fix for failure to build glibc
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>, "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>,Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>,"gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 12 May 2003 08:43:48 -0400
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Fix for failure to build glibc
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <200305091621.h49GLv8Y005343@speedy.slc.redhat.com>
On Fri, 2003-05-09 at 12:21, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> In message <email@example.com>, Andreas Jaeger writes:
> >firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
> >> In any event, my patch is going to have to come out -- it causes grief
> >> with C++ (I checked in before libstc++ had started building). Opps.
> >Opps, indeed :-( So, what will happen now?
> It's unclear at this time. We now have two major hunks of code which
> use similarly broken code (glibc and perl). I'm of the opinion that we need
> to try and make this work. Others disagree.
Agree. We should try to preserve current behaviour for now. Would it
be possible to start emitting a deprecation warning message when we run
into this code?