From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30908 invoked by alias); 6 Nov 2008 12:45:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 30868 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Nov 2008 12:45:15 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smarthost.piip.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (HELO smarthost.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE) (129.70.137.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:44:17 +0000 Received: from manam.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (manam.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [129.70.137.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smarthost.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4305A48384; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 13:44:14 +0100 (CET) From: Rainer Orth Message-ID: <18706.59036.587070.184415@manam.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:45:00 -0000 To: Ian Lance Taylor Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: 4.3/4.4 PATCH: Fix Solaris/x86 bootstrap with Sun ld (PR bootstrap/33100) In-Reply-To: References: <18671.26770.804364.445962@manam.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <18705.54181.858026.33670@manam.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> X-Mailer: VM 6.62 under Emacs 19.34.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-11/txt/msg00222.txt.bz2 Ian Lance Taylor writes: > > As I suggested in the original patch submission, it should be possible to > > move the inclusion of i386/t-crtstuff to libgcc/configure.ac and make it > > conditional on a linker test there. This way, only systems with broken Sun > > linkers would be penalized. I could well try that approach, since it's > > certainly cleaner and doesn't break unwind information on recent Solaris 11 > > where we don't have to. What do you think? > > I think it's up to you. You can also just split the config.gcc test > on the solaris version number. Ok, I'll give it a try. If all else fails, I could fall back to the current patch everywhere. Unfortunately, splitting on version number doesn't really help, because older versions of OpenSolaris (i.e. *-*-solaris2.11) have the bug, while newer ones are fixed. That's why it seems more appropriate to perform a feature test. > > What about the 4.2 branch? As I mentioned, the patch is needed there, too, > > and I've successfully bootstrapped on i386-pc-solaris2.10. Unfortunately, > > the cleaner approach outlined above isn't available here since there's no > > separate libgcc with it's own configure, so I fear it's either this hack or > > leave that branch broken. > > OK for 4.2 branch also. Thanks, I'll check it in there ASAP. Rainer ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainer Orth, Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University