This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: basic-improvements merge status

From: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
Cc: dje at watson dot ibm dot com, jh at suse dot cz, zack at codesourcery dot com,gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, rth at redhat dot com
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:38:12 -0600
Subject: Re: basic-improvements merge status
References: <20021216222302.GC3138@kam.mff.cuni.cz><200212162238.RAA31382@makai.watson.ibm.com><20021216224439.GF3138@kam.mff.cuni.cz>

Your patch to libmath/Makefile.am is fine, but your ChangeLog entry
should say libmath/Makefile.am, not Makefile.am.

>I am not configure expert, but can I detect the runtime library
>properties in it?  (when we are building without glibc, we need to
>rebuild anyway at least on Linux bootstrap, so this should be possible)
>Other way would be to use target macro.  Something like
>TARGET_C99_RUNTIME.  Ideal would be to push these functions into libgcc,
>but I am not quite sure how this can be done (ie so they will be
>overwriten by runtime).
>What sounds sane?

See:

GLIBCPPP_USE_C99. This is on by default for gnu/linux.

Keep in mind that tests for C99, and decisions on what to enable or
partially enable WRT C99 support in the C++ runtime is a continuing area
of controversy, especially with respect to wide character support.

-benjamin

Follow-Ups:
- Re: basic-improvements merge status
  - From: Jan Hubicka

References:
- Re: basic-improvements merge status
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: basic-improvements merge status
  - From: David Edelsohn
- Re: basic-improvements merge status
  - From: Jan Hubicka

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]