From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3184 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2013 08:13:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact crossgcc-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: crossgcc-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 3173 invoked by uid 89); 14 Apr 2013 08:13:23 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mail-bk0-f51.google.com (HELO mail-bk0-f51.google.com) (209.85.214.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:13:23 +0000 Received: by mail-bk0-f51.google.com with SMTP id y8so1933422bkt.10 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 01:13:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=RSMGdsfB1MoQrNVHaD5DjbGhV6556ZS0vmxbBetUias=; b=HQOjSjRLdgE3OCUBu4a7IyB0CYm2OP37fGuBBU7yQ4lB3ss+B3QMEw/m45PX2Aqy1j G/A2fZa1lsxnxyKkunLUS012+gqvX/p47I3y5euvOPerXW4GDg5f62rAHWucct2Eprrf Ts6O14viplH4qSajVipfm16TRnSdUSa6AxCdVSEiMOF0HokAjm0TP63jpsQ7pb9SAy3x 3w7tEfcpwNZH/7MVL2b4/rPzsL5/d5SEIR3LHvxjchCZ2Ls/DIMIQccxbxpfdDVOyCIq i4PWmbAr3BkUolWT7mlH1Ni1W2st6dGl/hxm2qPxVjPK3wi+JtLKJFZoFTH+JRzpAdGp zykQ== X-Received: by 10.205.25.6 with SMTP id rg6mr4925567bkb.101.1365927200368; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 01:13:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from loki.rebirth ([95.111.79.112]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gm14sm6369474bkc.7.2013.04.14.01.13.18 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 14 Apr 2013 01:13:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <516A651D.8070808@belemezov.net> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:13:00 -0000 From: Philip Belemezov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Yann E. MORIN" CC: crossgcc@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1 of 2] libc/eglibc: [OS X] Don't Use __block as a Name of an Argument References: <20130412215146.GA12092@free.fr> <5168E388.1000603@belemezov.net> <20130413095609.GA4599@free.fr> In-Reply-To: <20130413095609.GA4599@free.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmooBeBm+n5vs/BNGAETWZsmMTxQF68Vq2pwfGxD9pXgaChlj7L/buvtHwSzp5g4OKRad5t X-SW-Source: 2013-04/txt/msg00024.txt.bz2 On 13.04.2013 12:56, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Philip, All, > > On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 07:48:08AM +0300, Philip Belemezov wrote: >> On 13.04.2013 00:51, Yann E. MORIN wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 05:25:31PM +0200, Philip Belemezov wrote: >>>> # HG changeset patch >>>> # User Philip Belemezov >>>> # Date 1364300812 -7200 >>>> # Node ID fcdf7fc7fd1c00715c3d9651ff00d805ecfb8aa8 >>>> # Parent 0fc56e62cecf07e4cdaf866ee24d6893c4ade436 >>>> libc/eglibc: [OS X] Don't Use __block as a Name of an Argument >>>> >>>> Apple's GCC defines __block as >>>> >>>> #define __block __attribute__((__blocks__(byref))) >>>> >>>> which causes compilation to fail (attribute cannot be applied to argument). >>> >>> I do not understand why this patch is needed at all: we're not building >>> (e)glibc with the Apple-patched native gcc, but with a plain gcc that we >>> just build ourselves in the process. >>> >>> Unless I missed something... Can you elaborate, please? >> >> I don't have the details any more, but I believe this was happening during >> the bootstrap phase, before the target gcc has been built. > > The only case where we may do something in (e)glibc without having a > target gcc is to install the libc headers when using LinuxThreads, which > have not be supported in (e)glibc for some time (some years, now). > > In all other cases, building anything libc involves having a target gcc > first. > > The only reason we'd use the native compiler (and hence your > Apple-severed version of gcc) would be if (e)glibc needed to build a > program that runs on your build machine, and I am not aware of such a > case ( but I am sometimes easily proven wrong! ;-) ) > >> Let me reproduce the failure and see where exactly it choke. > > Thank you for investigating! :-) > > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > Hi, Yann! I am not able to reproduce this anymore. I don't recall doing any major changes on my system such as compiler updates. Perhaps it occurred with a different set of packages/versions. I've done two successful clean builds without the need for that patch. So, please drop it. -- Phil -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq