Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de writes:
Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com writes:
It looks to me that one part was left in libgcc/config/i386/crtfastmath.c:
#if !defined __x86_64__ defined __sun__ defined __svr4__
#include signal.h
#include ucontext.h
...
#endif
Right, missed
Andrew Hughes gnu.and...@redhat.com writes:
- Original Message -
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 09:03 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
* I'm removing the sys/loadavg.h check from classpath. Again, I'm
uncertain if this is desirable. In the past,
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
Solaris 9
Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com writes:
It looks to me that one part was left in libgcc/config/i386/crtfastmath.c:
#if !defined __x86_64__ defined __sun__ defined __svr4__
#include signal.h
#include ucontext.h
...
#endif
Right, missed it because it carried no Solaris 9 comment. I'll
Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com writes:
But for the Solaris 9 stuff, it crystal clear that this cannot occur on
Solaris 10 and up (no single-threaded case anymore since libthread.so.1
has been folded into libc.so.1). Ok to remove this part?
OK for the Solaris 9 - single-threaded part.
Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under
my Solaris maintainership.
A
Bruce Korb bk...@gnu.org writes:
On 04/16/14 04:16, Rainer Orth wrote:
I've already verified that trunk fails to build no sparc-sun-solaris2.9
and i386-pc-solaris2.9. Bootstraps on {i386,sparc}-*-solaris2.{10,11}
(and x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for good measure) are in progress. I'll
verify
Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de writes:
Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under
my Solaris maintainership.
A couple of questions, though:
* David: In target-supports.exp
Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com writes:
On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
* I'm removing the sys/loadavg.h check from classpath. Again, I'm
uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were
merged upstream by one of the libjava maintainers.
We should not
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 09:03 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
* I'm removing the sys/loadavg.h check from classpath. Again, I'm
uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were
merged upstream by one of the libjava maintainers.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de writes:
Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under
my Solaris
David Edelsohn dje@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de writes:
Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
David, could you please review this comment for correctness on AIX?
AIX TLS needs -pthread command line option.
Understood, but is the reason given in that comment (__tls_get_addr in
libthread) correct? Seems
David Edelsohn dje@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
David, could you please review this comment for correctness on AIX?
AIX TLS needs -pthread command line option.
Understood, but is the reason given in that comment
- Original Message -
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 09:03 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
* I'm removing the sys/loadavg.h check from classpath. Again, I'm
uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were
merged upstream
On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
* I'm removing the sys/loadavg.h check from classpath. Again, I'm
uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were
merged upstream by one of the libjava maintainers.
We should not diverge from GNU Classpath unless there is a
On 04/16/14 04:16, Rainer Orth wrote:
I've already verified that trunk fails to build no sparc-sun-solaris2.9
and i386-pc-solaris2.9. Bootstraps on {i386,sparc}-*-solaris2.{10,11}
(and x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for good measure) are in progress. I'll
verify that there are no unexpected
But for the Solaris 9 stuff, it crystal clear that this cannot occur on
Solaris 10 and up (no single-threaded case anymore since libthread.so.1
has been folded into libc.so.1). Ok to remove this part?
OK for the Solaris 9 - single-threaded part.
--
Eric Botcazou
Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under
my Solaris maintainership.
A
* Eric: In libgcc/config/sparc/sol2-unwind.h, I've removed the Solaris 9
cases after verifying that the cuh_pattern's used there only occur in
Solaris 9 (from FCS to the latest libthread.so.1 patch), but not even
in Solaris 10 FCS.
For Solaris 10, do you have any more details on
Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com writes:
* Eric: In libgcc/config/sparc/sol2-unwind.h, I've removed the Solaris 9
cases after verifying that the cuh_pattern's used there only occur in
Solaris 9 (from FCS to the latest libthread.so.1 patch), but not even
in Solaris 10 FCS.
For
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under
my Solaris maintainership.
A couple of questions, though:
* Uros: I'm
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
* Ian: I've removed Solaris 8 and 9 support from libgo. I'm uncertain
if you want this or rather keep that support for the 4.[789] branches?
I want it. I don't try to maintain exact copies of older GCC
Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
* Ian: I've removed Solaris 8 and 9 support from libgo. I'm uncertain
if you want this or rather keep that support for the 4.[789] branches?
I want it. I don't try
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Rainer Orth
r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
* Ian: I've removed Solaris 8 and 9 support from libgo. I'm uncertain
if you want
25 matches
Mail list logo
