From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-452790-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 7414 invoked by alias); 29 May 2014 08:14:10 -0000
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
Received: (qmail 7363 invoked by uid 48); 29 May 2014 08:14:06 -0000
From: "bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/61331] [ARM] GCC build broken since r210964/r210965
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 08:14:00 -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: 4.10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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: <bug-61331-4-cNS1ErYZyf@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61331-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61331-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg02482.txt.bz2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61331

--- Comment #6 from Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de> ---
(In reply to rsandifo@gcc.gnu.org from comment #5)
> (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #4)
> > (In reply to rsandifo@gcc.gnu.org from comment #3)
> > > (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #2)
> > > > Richard,
> > > > 
> > > > the build is still broken, even after r211031.
> > > > 
> > > > could you please have a look?
> > > 
> > > r211031 wasn't related to this.  Please see:
> > > 
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-05/msg02312.html
> > > 
> > > for the patch I'd suggested.
> > 
> > Ok, this would fix the boot-strap problem.
> > Are you gonna apply it now?
> 
> It needs to be approved by a maintainer first.

well, did not explicitly ask for approval?

The message should be marked as PATCH,
and contain a statement like:

"Boot-strapped and regression-tested on arm-xyz-eabi,
OK for thunk"?