From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 95308 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2016 19:09:52 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 95298 invoked by uid 89); 16 Nov 2016 19:09:51 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:874, kristerwalfridssongmailcom, sk:__int_l, stdatomic.h X-HELO: resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net Received: from resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net (HELO resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net) (96.114.154.164) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:09:50 +0000 Received: from resomta-po-19v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.243]) by resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id 75aXcXK49cEL175afcl2dH; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:09:49 +0000 Received: from up.mrs.kithrup.com ([24.4.193.248]) by resomta-po-19v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id 75aecLtEeouYh75aectUJy; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:09:49 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix NetBSD bootstrap From: Mike Stump In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:09:00 -0000 Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Krister Walfridsson X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfLY+QpPg3ggX+fkefzC8NAr2PlOQqUyWAA35r8UcMbICBXN684TnLERThcGoXAOLM/ULsL6wVxEotEKrmEa9MMSMuf6e690Ej3FVFCK5wHjWXBzElrWk SGu3Qu70zo5arQQhPWcI2wvE+X3H1UwyxiMFEZ6isf+Z5mHvhPP4HKKXRhKfxhZYRSleQS+mvtY3fEYjXF5ggzHx4heGS9RCK160SlaDRiQlkORRnR6wUogs X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg01696.txt.bz2 > On Nov 16, 2016, at 9:12 AM, Krister Walfridsson wrote: >=20 > NetBSD fails bootstrap with > stdatomic.h:55:17: error: unknown type name '__INT_LEAST8_TYPE__' > This is fixed by the following patch (only i386 and x86_64 for now. I'll > do the other ports after fixing some more issues -- the NetBSD support is > rather broken at the moment...) >=20 > I'm the NetBSD maintainer, so I belive I don't need approval to commit th= is. But I have been absent for a long time, so it makes sense for someone t= o review at least this first patch. Looks reasonable. The biggest issue would be if any of those values change= d through time, and the current version works for older netbsd releases, th= e patch could break them. Of course, I don't have any visibility into how = any of those values might have changed through time.