From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19073 invoked by alias); 15 Jul 2006 16:25:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 18888 invoked by alias); 15 Jul 2006 16:25:10 -0000 Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2006 16:25:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060715162510.18887.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/28102] [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "ams at gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-07/txt/msg01130.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #11 from ams at gnu dot org 2006-07-15 16:25 ------- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GNU Hurd bootstrap error: 'OPTION_GLIBC' undeclared > Can you please just apply the patch and close the bug? Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect. The patch is correct, that you think that the code we use from */linux.h should be in */gnu.h is not related to this bug. This is the setup we have used for almost 10 years, and I see no reason to change it. The setup works, it minimises the workload on both parties, and it is clean. If you don't want to commit the patch then that is fine, it isn't like GCC can even compile on the GNU system due to the other bugs with patches being neglected (mostly by me). Happy hacking. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28102