From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 5EC803858D35; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:45:39 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5EC803858D35 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1700048739; bh=cOlNPSpW+90IrIFKnSzdSCsEVPxOFGKIIdO0wCH3zdo=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=SLXH8RQQ0LaVQ3wzhNrhC+QmopTyt0wrh2OMTFhtZn+xgCDj4sAW2ZWty31+uUdeV 11+0MNY0Jc+X9AbqjO2KzqvQqccgw64V5q4eRzqtGzHROtEi8jNs9tbmDnS8ioUf/R kwx/UxL8V5hSqstO9TcXi1sB5kPCOZ20hCD8RthY= From: "costas.argyris at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/111170] [13/14 regression] Malformed manifest does not allow to run gcc on Windows XP (Accessing a corrupted shared library) since r13-6552-gd11e088210a551 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:45:39 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.2.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: costas.argyris at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D111170 --- Comment #4 from Costas Argyris --- A couple of comments: 1) Isn't Windows XP officially not supported any more? If that is the ca= se, does it make sense to introduce a new configure option solely to deal with = an unsupported host? I'm not even sure why this is called a regression, giv= en that it breaks something that is not officially supported. 2) Would it be easier if, instead of excluding the manifest via a new confi= gure option, we somehow made the manifest file itself smart enough to ignore its= elf when running on Windows XP? Based on your comment above about the compatibility section in the MSYS2 manifest, it sounds like the GCC manifest could get a similar compatibility section that basically says "ignore this manifest when running on XP (or earlier)" such that it doesn't break in these old Windows versions. I searched for the MSYS2 manifest and I think it sources it from cygwin: https://sourceware.org/git/?p=3Dcygwin-apps/windows-default-manifest.git;a= =3Dblob;f=3Ddefault-manifest.rc;h=3D2c4ddf4783b953afaf7df9473450bf95842d191= 1;hb=3DHEAD which has separate entries for all the Windows versions, marking them as 'supportedOS'. Would it be possible to do this in the GCC manifest and solve this problem,= or did I misunderstand how the compatibility section works?=