From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12402 invoked by alias); 17 May 2011 16:45:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 12381 invoked by uid 22791); 17 May 2011 16:45:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 May 2011 16:45:28 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4HGjP59015950 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 17 May 2011 12:45:25 -0400 Received: from greed.delorie.com (ovpn-113-169.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.169]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p4HGjOi0032314 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 17 May 2011 12:45:24 -0400 Received: from greed.delorie.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by greed.delorie.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4HGjNFr011345; Tue, 17 May 2011 12:45:23 -0400 Received: (from dj@localhost) by greed.delorie.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p4HGjMHA011344; Tue, 17 May 2011 12:45:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 20:03:00 -0000 Message-Id: <201105171645.p4HGjMHA011344@greed.delorie.com> From: DJ Delorie To: Richard Earnshaw CC: vinschen@redhat.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org In-reply-to: <1305648468.29122.25.camel@e102346-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (message from Richard Earnshaw on Tue, 17 May 2011 17:07:48 +0100) Subject: Re: Libiberty: POSIXify psignal definition References: <20110505073039.GA23122@calimero.vinschen.de> <1305646410.29122.21.camel@e102346-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <201105171552.p4HFq4ch009720@greed.delorie.com> <1305648468.29122.25.camel@e102346-lin.cambridge.arm.com> 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/msg01236.txt.bz2 > So regardless of whether the changes to newlib are a good idea or not, I > think the fix to libiberty is still right. Irrelevent. I said I'd accept that change *after* the real problem is fixed. The real problem hasn't been fixed. The real problem is that libibery should NOT INCLUDE PSIGNAL AT ALL if newlib has it. What *should* have happened, is libiberty should have been fixed *first*, and newlib waited until a gcc/binutils release cycle happened, so that at least ONE version of those could build with newlib.