This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ 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: Improving --enable-libstdcxx-time

From: Václav Zeman <vhaisman at gmail dot com>
To: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 00:10:58 +0200
Subject: Re: Improving --enable-libstdcxx-time
References: <CAH6eHdQzDRwEYFrFqY0Yv8yCX+fKxcFjqz4GKaO6z+qpzmwOAA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAH6eHdT160a5nfGGHiw3B0pU+toaT0rejAUahjxexBXhQ+N5_A at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAH6eHdQgRD74ichX2E2cv0RY8prY-f4-xNG_rOaz07n1ACH3iQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20130528230324 dot E8EE32C05D at topped-with-meat dot com> <CAH6eHdQTOYOYFhkdpdyT_aBxAGT73W-4WKJdaqmYpcKAi+RazQ at mail dot gmail dot com>

On 05/29/2013 10:20 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 29 May 2013 00:03, Roland McGrath wrote:
>> Version checks are pretty much always wrong.  It should use an empirical
>> check on whether you can link a program calling clock_gettime without
>> passing -lrt.
> 
> In principle I agree, but IIUC we can't do link tests for libstdc++
> when building a cross-compiler, and the rule is that the same
> configure flags should produce the same configuration for
> cross-compilers as for native, so we can't do link tests by default
> ever ... so we can't make use of your clock_gettime changes unless
> users explicitly request them, which they don't do (because they
> probably don't know about it.)
Unless libstdc++ is somehow special, you should be able to do link
tests. The only thing you really cannot do should be run tests.

-- 
VZ

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

References:
- Re: Improving --enable-libstdcxx-time
  - From: Roland McGrath
- Re: Improving --enable-libstdcxx-time
  - From: Jonathan Wakely

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