[Bug bootstrap/58242] [4.9 regression] linux-android.c:40:7: error: 'OPTION_BIONIC' was not declared in this scope breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-linux

[aivchenk at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58242

--- Comment #3 from Alexander Ivchenko aivchenk at gmail dot com ---
Should be fixed now by r202274

[Bug bootstrap/58242] [4.9 regression] linux-android.c:40:7: error: 'OPTION_BIONIC' was not declared in this scope breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-linux

[mikpe at it dot uu.se]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58242

Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se ---
Yes, bootstrap is restored on powerpc64-linux with trunk @ 202274.  Closing.

[Bug bootstrap/58242] [4.9 regression] linux-android.c:40:7: error: 'OPTION_BIONIC' was not declared in this scope breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-linux

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58242

Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2013-09-02
 CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
  Build|powerpc64-linux |powerpc*-linux

--- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Likewise on PowerPC/Linux.

[Bug bootstrap/58242] [4.9 regression] linux-android.c:40:7: error: 'OPTION_BIONIC' was not declared in this scope breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-linux

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58242

Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0

[Bug bootstrap/58242] [4.9 regression] linux-android.c:40:7: error: 'OPTION_BIONIC' was not declared in this scope breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-linux

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58242

Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||aivchenk at gmail dot com

--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
Patch at [1] that fixes this issue is awaiting review.

[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-08/msg01245.html