This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
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: <474C8FA4.2040603@codesourcery.com> <474C95BA.1060807@t-online.de> <474C96C1.7010208@codesourcery.com> <474C98AA.50105@t-online.de> <474C9A65.2060902@codesourcery.com> <474C9B33.8060503@t-online.de> <474C9CBD.2070708@codesourcery.com> <87fxyqdc45.fsf@firetop.home> <474D943C.4030106@codesourcery.com> <877ik0aerh.fsf@firetop.home> <20071130022132.GL17368@sygehus.dk> <87sl2o6s1g.fsf@firetop.home> <47505D76.4040207@codesourcery.com> <878x4eu4c8.fsf@firetop.home> <47531D1D.8020805@codesourcery.com>
Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> 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.)
Richard