https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #30 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #29 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to andyg1001 from comment #28)
> Erm, am I the first to notice that this "solution" is broken?
No, see https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2016-09/msg00228.html
> The os_defines.h include that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
andyg1001 at hotmail dot co.uk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andyg1001 at hotmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #26 from Joseph S. Myers jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-09
22:13:49 UTC ---
The __USE_GNU conditional has now been removed from glibc after further
discussion on libc-alpha, so the libstdc++ changes can be reverted (probably
after
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #27 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-03-09
23:48:17 UTC ---
Thanks a lot Joseph, a very good solution.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-01
13:30:26 UTC ---
f17 doesn't include glibc 2.16, just patched glibc 2.15, which doesn't have
these header changes yet.
The thing I don't like on the last patch is that it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-01
13:50:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)
Wouldn't an unconditional
#if _GNU_SOURCE
extern char *gets (char *__s);
using ::gets;
#endif
work as well?
extern C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #26794|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #24 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
07:14:02 UTC ---
Author: bkoz
Date: Fri Mar 2 07:13:55 2012
New Revision: 184774
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184774
Log:
2012-03-01 Benjamin Kosnik
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
07:29:29 UTC ---
extern C extern
(twice) - too many externs?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #19 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-01
00:21:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 26794
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26794
gets conditionally declared/used
Here's a way to deal with gets that is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2012-02-28 15:23:38 UTC ---
If the libstdc++ people are going to do something for 4.7, it really needs
to be done very soon.
Let's assume glibc should at least
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-02-28
15:35:59 UTC ---
If the release managers agree, I would be in favor of a quick fix per Comment
3, with a huge comment in the code explaining the issue. But I can't test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #12 from Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org 2012-02-28
15:47:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
If the libstdc++ people are going to do something for 4.7, it really needs
to be done very soon.
The question is: what do
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-28
15:49:26 UTC ---
I'm ok with #c3 patch + comment if it works, using special configure macro
instead of __GLIBC_PREREQ is IMHO undesirable, because then if you build gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #14 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-28 16:09:52 UTC ---
I can confirm that a build for arm-linux-gnueabi completes and do some
cross-testing on qemu if that's deemed to be enough.
Any other ideas for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-28
16:18:30 UTC ---
Ideally, when using
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include stdio.h
in a C++ program ::gets wouldn't be available (the _GNU_SOURCE requests GNU
namespace rather than
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #16 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-02-28
16:42:55 UTC ---
I suppose that post 4.7.0 we have to revisit this issue anyway, because C++11
definitely wants to declare std::gets, irrespective of C11. I'm wondering
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #17 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2012-02-28 17:05:50 UTC ---
2.15 has the gets prototype. It's 2.16 where it has been removed (but the
version in the headers only changes from 2.15 to 2.16 when
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #18 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-02-28
18:25:54 UTC ---
Ah, thanks Joseph. Thus, to repeat, anything we do in terms of macros has to be
for *2.16* and later.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-05
21:00:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Yeah, IMHO the removal of gets (== ::gets) for _GNU_SOURCE is very much
intentional. C++ probably only talks about std::gets,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-05
21:26:26 UTC ---
Though personally I'm not concerned if libstdc++ doesn't define gets(), noone
should be using it, I am concerned that libstdc++ fails to build because of the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org 2012-01-11
13:49:54 UTC ---
If we are just going to declare gets when glibc doesn't, the easiest solution
is a fixinclude that reverts Ulrich's latest glibc commit. Somehow that
28 matches
Mail list logo
