From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6160 invoked by alias); 12 Jul 2010 12:54:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 6111 invoked by uid 48); 12 Jul 2010 12:54:22 -0000 Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 12:54:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100712125422.6110.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug testsuite/42843] --enable-build-with-cxx plugin tests fail In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "iains at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-07/txt/msg01275.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #10 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-12 12:54 ------- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > Perhaps we just need something like... > In the native boostrap case, you probably want > CC_FOR_TARGET / CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET / CXX_FOR_TARGET / CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET, > but you still need COMPILER COMPILER_FLAGS (or its equivalent) in the > case of non-bootstrap builds (native or otherwise). since the plugin is to run on the host, looking at the top level makefile HOST_EXPORTS defines CC - so, as you say, the current settings in gcc/Makefile are honoring that. However, it's clear that CC is ending up set to the bootstrap compiler and not the one built for stage2/3. I wonder if that means that HOST_EXPORTS needs to be re-written for each stage.. Is there any cross-tool known to support plugins? (I get no response for cris-elf, s390x, mipsia64 and armel-linux-gnueabi). No error, just silently skips all plugin tests. Or is there a requirement that the host compiler is >= some gcc version in that case? -- iains at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |iains at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42843