From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-382448-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 22674 invoked by alias); 3 Feb 2012 17:28:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 22654 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Feb 2012 17:28:41 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:28:29 +0000
From: "iains at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/51906] thread lock test failures on darwin11 under Xcode 4.2
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:28:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: iains at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.7.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-51906-4-8cXMKKYgD7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-51906-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-51906-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-02/txt/msg00382.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906

--- Comment #46 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-03 17:27:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #45)
> Then I think we have to disable __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT unconditionally
> on darwin.

I hope not.
putting -mmacosx-version-min=10.6 - will cause the macro value to be 1060 - so
defeating it.  One would not expect it to run on 10.7.

If one puts -mmacosx-version-min=10.6  and sysroots to the 10.6 SDK - *and*
then transfers the executable to a 10.6 system - then that should work.  If
not, then I agree.

> If the bug is later fixed in (say) 10.8 then we could use the init macro if
> MIN_REQUIRED >= 1080 since we know that it won't be run on a system where the
> bug is present.

Indeed.. let's hope its 107x rather than 1080 ...