On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 at 15:42, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2023 16:30:12 +0100 > > From: Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches > > > On Thu, 1 Jun 2023 at 16:59, Jonathan Wakely via Libstdc++ < > > libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > > Tested x86_64-linux. I'd appreciate a second set of eyeballs on this > > > before I push it. > > > > > > > Pushed to trunk now. > > ...as r14-1581-g97a5e8a2a48d16, after which (apparently) > *all* linking libstdc++ tests for cris-elf (a "newlib > target") get (for example): > > FAIL: 17_intro/freestanding.cc (test for excess errors) > Excess errors: > /x/cris-elf/pre/cris-elf/bin/ld: cannot find -liconv: No such file or > directory > > (deduced from libstdc++.log and the commits in the range > ce2188e4320c..585c660f041c where 4144 regressions in > libstdc++ were introduced for cris-elf) > Gah. I tested building cris-elf but didn't run any tests. I *thought* I compared the configure results before and after the patch too, but I guess I missed something, or it didn't show up where I looked. > From the generated configure and a brief RTFM for AS_IF, it > looks almost like AS_IF was "miscompiled" and behaving > literally AS_IF (!) in that the condition TEST1 (here > [$GLIBCXX_IS_NATIVE] seems to be emitted *after* the > RUN-IF-TRUE1 clause (the next 31 lines). Not obvious what > went wrong. I even tried regenerating configure. HTH. > > Let's just revert it then. The manual says we should use AS_IF, but what we had previously was working well enough. I'll figure out what happened here later.