This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES
- From: Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at nildram dot co dot uk>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <rask at sygehus dot dk>, Bernd Schmidt <bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de>, Jie Zhang <jzhang918 at gmail dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, hp at gcc dot gnu dot org, dj at redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 15:54:45 +0000
- Subject: Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES
- References: <474C8FA4.firstname.lastname@example.org> <474C95BA.email@example.com> <474C96C1.firstname.lastname@example.org> <474C98AA.email@example.com> <474C9A65.firstname.lastname@example.org> <474C9B33.email@example.com> <474C9CBD.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <474D943C.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20071130022132.GL17368@sygehus.dk> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <47505D76.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <47531D1D.email@example.com>
Mark Mitchell <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Anyway, given that there have been objections to the patch generally,
>> I realise that the pre-approval is void.
> I think there's no controversy over the libstdc++ change, so let's put
> that in. If nothing else, it makes the libstdc++ configury more
> self-consistent; if we decide to change the overall strategy, then we
> can do that all at once.
Well, Rask's patch would make the libstdc++ change unnecessary,
so it seems premature to change libstdc++ now. (Not that I'm objecting
to anyone else doing it. I'm just not comfortable doing it myself,
especially since, on its own, it doesn't affect any of "my" targets.)