https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Xi Ruoyao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6bf383c37e6131a8e247e8a0997d55d65c830b6d
commit r12-1924-g6bf383c37e6131a8e247e8a0997d55d65c830b6d
Author: Xi Ruoyao
Date: Mon Jun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #17 from Xi Ruoyao ---
Revised patch, matching __has_include(...):
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-June/573789.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #16 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Bruce Korb from comment #15)
> Obviously, "print_quote()" was needed early on (1999) and then saved for
> prosperity :). Your patch is inadequate because it will have to not expand
> 'linux' in a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #15 from Bruce Korb ---
Obviously, "print_quote()" was needed early on (1999) and then saved for
prosperity :). Your patch is inadequate because it will have to not expand
'linux' in a line such as:
#if __has_include()
In other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #14 from Bruce Korb ---
Reworking fixfixes.c seems pretty heavy duty.
I'm downloading the GCC sources now. I'll take a peek tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at mengyan1223 dot wang
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #12 from Bruce Korb ---
I'll put it on my to-do list, but I might be participating in a fire evacuation
tonight or tomorrow and I haven't built GCC in several years now. I'm going to
guess that you have to not do the substitution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
Tendel10 at protonmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Tendel10 at protonmail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #8 from Andreas Schwab ---
Yes, nothing has changed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Current glibc uses
#ifdef __has_include
# if __has_include ("linux/stat.h")
# include "linux/stat.h"
# ifdef STATX_TYPE
# define __statx_timestamp_defined 1
# define __statx_defined 1
# endif
# endif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab ---
PR80005 is not relevant here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Well, at least PR80005 has been fixed...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
IMHO not needed for 9.2, glibc will just behave as it used to be ever before
with this header. I'd say let's fix it in on the trunk, let's fix PR80005 and
then we can talk about backporting.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
16 matches
Mail list logo
