Ping^3? Joseph, I'd been cc'ing you on this because it's driver-related and I didn't find a more-obvious reviewer. Is there someone else I should be asking to review it? Alternately, is this a change that should be discussed on gcc@ before having the actual patch reviewed?
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Brooks Moses <bmo...@google.com> wrote: > Ping^2? > > On 08/22/2013 02:00 PM, Brooks Moses wrote: >> Ping? >> >> On 08/08/2013 02:10 PM, Brooks Moses wrote: >>> As discussed in PR/42955, when GCC is built as a cross-compiler, it >>> will install "gcc", "g++", "c++", and "gfortran" binaries in >>> $(target)/bin, as well as installing the $target-gcc and so forth in >>> bin. However, these binaries in $(target)/bin do not work; they >>> cannot find libexec. >>> >>> More to the point, this bug has been open for three years with no >>> traffic, and the failure started significantly before that. Clearly, >>> making these work is not a priority. Further, these binaries are real >>> files, not symlinks or hard links; they take up actual space. >>> >>> As discussed on the bug, Joseph argues that $(target)/bin "contains >>> executables from binutils for internal use by GCC; that's its sole >>> purpose. The files installed by GCC there aren't used by GCC (rather, >>> the public installed copy of the driver gets used when collect2 needs >>> to call back to the driver), so shouldn't be installed." >>> >>> Thus, this patch, which simply removes these broken executables. >>> Tested by building a cross-compiler and confirming that they are gone, >>> and by building a native compiler and confirming that the expected >>> bin/gcc, bin/g++, bin/c++, and bin/gfortran are still present. >>> >>> Ok to commit? >>> >>> - Brooks >>> >>> ---- >>> 2013-08-08 Brooks Moses <bmo...@google.com> >>> >>> PR driver/42955 >>> * Makefile.in: Do not install driver binaries in $(target)/bin. >>> >>> PR driver/42955 >>> * Make-lang.in: Do not install driver binaries in $(target)/bin. >>> >> >> >
