This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [ARM/FDPIC 02/21] [ARM] FDPIC: Handle arm*-*-uclinuxfdpiceabi in configure scripts
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Christophe Lyon <christophe dot lyon at st dot com>
- Cc: <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <christophe dot lyon at linaro dot org>
- Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 20:43:54 +0000
- Subject: Re: [ARM/FDPIC 02/21] [ARM] FDPIC: Handle arm*-*-uclinuxfdpiceabi in configure scripts
- References: <20180525080354.13295-1-christophe.lyon@st.com> <20180525080354.13295-3-christophe.lyon@st.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1805251631330.30141@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <39e52699-0fbd-498b-e9bc-553f127f29c1@st.com>
On Mon, 28 May 2018, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 25/05/2018 18:32, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 May 2018, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> >
> > > In libtool.m4, we use uclinuxfdpiceabi in cases where ELF shared
> > > libraries support is required, as uclinux does not guarantee that.
> >
> > To confirm: has this libtool.m4 patch gone upstream (or at least been
> > submitted upstream, if not yet reviewed)?
> >
> Hi Joseph,
>
> No sorry, I didn't realize I had to post this patch elsewhere than
> gcc-patches.
>
> I'm going to post it to the libtool project.
>
> Looking at gcc/libtool.m4's history, it seems the process would then be to
> cherry-pick my patch into gcc, rather than merge with the upstream version?
In practice, probably. We'd like to update autoconf/automake/libtool from
upstream, but updating any one of those components is quite risky when
they are very out of date as at present, and there may be dependencies
between them (and as previously discussed, updating libtool will require
reverting one upstream libtool patch incompatible with how the GCC build
handles sysroots).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com