This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: [build] Move unwinder to toplevel libgcc (v2)
- From: Rainer Orth <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>, Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de>, Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>, Steve Ellcey <sje at cup dot hp dot com>, Richard Earnshaw <richard dot earnshaw at arm dot com>, Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana dot radhakrishnan at arm dot com>, Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>, Douglas Rupp <rupp at gnat dot com>, Tristan Gingold <gingold at adacore dot com>, Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>, Kaz Kojima <kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org>, David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Sterling Augustine <augustine dot sterling at gmail dot com>, Arnaud Charlet <charlet at adacore dot com>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Nicola Pero <nicola dot pero at meta-innovation dot com>, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:56:39 +0200
- Subject: Re: [build] Move unwinder to toplevel libgcc (v2)
- References: <ydd1ux2oc1u.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1108101332410.28612@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <yddzkjhl6oh.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1108101348590.28612@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
"Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com> writes:
>> This is strange: they copy explicitly goes into $(gcc_objdir): from
>> libgcc/Makefile.in:
>>
>> install-unwind_h:
>> cp unwind.h $(gcc_objdir)/include/unwind.h
>> chmod a+r $(gcc_objdir)/include/unwind.h
>>
>> For an in-tree build, the source directory cannot be read-only, for a
>> VPATH build I don't see how this can happen. Could you please check?
>
> This is a VPATH build and the issue is that the *file* unwind.h is
> readonly having been copied from a readonly source (and install-unwind_h
I see. I'd been thinking of a source tree mounted read-only, not the
actual files changed to be read-only.
> must, I suppose, end up getting called more than once so that the second
> copy tries to copy over a readonly file; the 26478 fix was to remove the
True: it is called once per multilib.
> target of the copy with rm -f before copying).
Makes sense. Toplevel dependencies should take care that the file isn't
used by another target library in the small time window between removal
and copy.
Could you try the obvious patch? It's probably quicker than me
recreating the setup.
Thanks.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University