updated patch for implicit libcall generation

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Jan Hubicka wrote:

> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 10:28:07PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > > ... or are there targets in subdirectories including none of these?
> > 
> > Yes.  :-(
> I was affraid of this answer.  I guess I need to produce include graph
> of all machine headers and find minimal cut in it.  At least it is not
> NP complette :)

There's a case for this configuration always going in the OS or CPU/OS
headers, rather than e.g. declaring that a CPU will have no systems with
these functions.  Having it in common OS headers allows easy updating to
condition on which versions of the OS do/don't have the functions across
all architectures.  The minimum number of headers needn't be the "correct"
choice.

Getting the target deprecations / removals done first reduces the work
involved.  (And this sort of cross-targets work is one reason for doing
the deprecations.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk