This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [v3] Fix / clean-up config vs crosses (5/n): avoid a TRY_RUN


Hi,
Yes, breaking ABI compatibility is of course a major issue, so I
wouldn't suggest doing that. Obviously, run-time checks impose some
overhead, but for future situations similar to this, it might be the
best thing. You have to open the file anyhow; if the open fails, then
set a global variable and fall back to Plan B. I would suspect that the
cost would be pretty low.
Agreed. In any case, we should consider that the problem with GLIBCXX_CHECK_RANDOM_TR1 impacts a minor, isolated, part of <tr1/random> (by itself, the implementation of a non-normative TR), I think the crosse-compilers people can live with this bit of incorrectness in the configury for a little more time.
As for GCC_CHECK_UNWIND_GETIPINFO, that looks like something that could
be a compile-time test (on all targets, whether or not native). As
discussed previously, it really *should* be a link-time test, but unless
people are willing to rethink the one-tree build stuff, we're not
allowed link-time tests.
Ok, but then, let's ask the author of the test: Steve?
And, as for AM_ICONV, unfortunately, I'm totally iconv-illiterate. :-(
Sigh, two of us ;)

Paolo.


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