From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26255 invoked by alias); 30 Nov 2007 18:59:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 26154 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Nov 2007 18:59:17 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 18:59:09 +0000 Received: (qmail 13021 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2007 18:59:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.2?) (mitchell@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 30 Nov 2007 18:59:08 -0000 Message-ID: <47505D76.4040207@codesourcery.com> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 21:10:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen , Mark Mitchell , Bernd Schmidt , Jie Zhang , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, GCC Patches , hp@gcc.gnu.org, dj@redhat.com, rsandifo@nildram.co.uk Subject: Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES References: <474C8FA4.2040603@codesourcery.com> <474C95BA.1060807@t-online.de> <474C96C1.7010208@codesourcery.com> <474C98AA.50105@t-online.de> <474C9A65.2060902@codesourcery.com> <474C9B33.8060503@t-online.de> <474C9CBD.2070708@codesourcery.com> <87fxyqdc45.fsf@firetop.home> <474D943C.4030106@codesourcery.com> <877ik0aerh.fsf@firetop.home> <20071130022132.GL17368@sygehus.dk> <87sl2o6s1g.fsf@firetop.home> In-Reply-To: <87sl2o6s1g.fsf@firetop.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2007-11/txt/msg01721.txt.bz2 Richard Sandiford wrote: > 2006-04-18 DJ Delorie > > * configure.in (m32c): Build libstdc++-v3. Pass flags to > reference libgloss so that libssp can be built in a combined > tree. > * configure: Regenerate. > Mark, DJ? Do you agree it's OK to drop that hunk? I'm not quite sure if you're asking for agreement to leave it in our sourcebase, or to remove it therefrom, so, unambiguously: I would prefer to revert DJ's change, for the same reason as the other changes under discussion, so that we're consistent across architectures. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery mark@codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x713