Re: [GCC-6][RFA 1/2]: Don't ignore target_header_dir when deciding inhibit_libc

2016-10-17 Thread Andre Vieira (lists) 
On 09/09/16 15:32, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> 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
> 
Ping.

[GCC-6][RFA 1/2]: Don't ignore target_header_dir when deciding inhibit_libc

2016-09-09 Thread Andre Vieira (lists) 
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