On 27/05/16 15:51, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> On 07/04/16 10:30, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >>> On 17/03/16 16:33, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >>>> On 23/10/15 12:31, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >>>>> On 10/12/2015 11:58 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Index: gcc/configure.ac >>>>>> =================================================================== >>>>>> --- gcc/configure.ac (revision 228530) >>>>>> +++ gcc/configure.ac (working copy) >>>>>> @@ -1993,7 +1993,7 @@ elif test "x$TARGET_SYSTEM_ROOT" != x; t >>>>>> fi >>>>>> >>>>>> if test x$host != x$target || test "x$TARGET_SYSTEM_ROOT" != x; then >>>>>> - if test "x$with_headers" != x; then >>>>>> + if test "x$with_headers" != x && test "x$with_headers" != xyes; then >>>>>> target_header_dir=$with_headers >>>>>> elif test "x$with_sysroot" = x; then >>>>>> >>>>>> target_header_dir="${test_exec_prefix}/${target_noncanonical}/sys-include" >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm missing the beginning of this conversation, but this looks like a >>>>> reasonable change (avoiding target_header_dir=yes for --with-headers). >>>>> So, approved. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Bernd >>>>> >>>> Hi there, >>>> >>>> I was wondering why this never made it to trunk. I am currently running >>>> into an issue that this patch would fix. > > Seems I never actually checked this in, even though it was approved. > Thanks for the reminder, I've now checked the patch in. > > Bye, > Ulrich >
Is it OK to backport this fix to GCC-6? It applies cleanly, builds and no regressions for arm-none-eabi. Regards, Andre