From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31101 invoked by alias); 9 May 2011 11:42:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 31091 invoked by uid 22791); 9 May 2011 11:42:24 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from lo.gmane.org (HELO lo.gmane.org) (80.91.229.12) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:42:12 +0000 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QJOqo-0005le-OB for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 13:42:10 +0200 Received: from 93-34-184-88.ip51.fastwebnet.it ([93.34.184.88]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 09 May 2011 13:42:10 +0200 Received: from bonzini by 93-34-184-88.ip51.fastwebnet.it with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 09 May 2011 13:42:10 +0200 To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH] allow setting LDFLAGS_FOR_TARGET in top-level configuration. Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 15:15:00 -0000 Message-ID: <4DC7D306.9020507@gnu.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Doug Kwan , gcc-patches , "Beare, Bruce J" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110307 Fedora/3.1.9-0.39.b3pre.fc14 Lightning/1.0b3pre Mnenhy/0.8.3 Thunderbird/3.1.9 In-Reply-To: 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: 2011-05/txt/msg00651.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20110509151500.5KiFwyi_YWn_qK4m---adBLUqKYZrUql4AzurBQ-Uoc@z> On 05/09/2011 11:49 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > The x86 Android toolchain needs setting LDFLAGS_FOR_TARGET to > > build. This patch does that. The patch was tested by bootstrapping > > natively on x86_64 linux. Do I also need to submit this to binutils > > as well? > > My view is that you don't need to*submit* it separately, but a toplevel > commit to GCC should always be immediately followed by committing the same > changes to the src repository without needing separate approval. This is correct; but if you want to CC binutils, that's also kind. Paolo