From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 120053 invoked by alias); 29 May 2015 21:46:54 -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 120039 invoked by uid 89); 29 May 2015 21:46:54 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 29 May 2015 21:46:52 +0000 Received: from nat-ies.mentorg.com ([192.94.31.2] helo=SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1YyS76-00043h-Nh from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Fri, 29 May 2015 14:46:48 -0700 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.224.2; Fri, 29 May 2015 22:46:47 +0100 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1YyS74-0006sb-0E; Fri, 29 May 2015 21:46:46 +0000 Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 23:24:00 -0000 From: Joseph Myers To: Mike Frysinger CC: Subject: Re: [PATCH] unify -posix/-pthread cpp handling for gnu-user targets In-Reply-To: <1432853300-20232-1-git-send-email-vapier@gentoo.org> Message-ID: References: <1432853300-20232-1-git-send-email-vapier@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg02833.txt.bz2 On Thu, 28 May 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote: > Some targets still define -posix/-pthread in SUBTARGET_CPP_SPEC and in > CPP_SUBTARGET_SPEC, but I can't seem to find any reference to either of > those defines. Are they dead/confused code and I should just delete it ? Any correct definitions of those macros will have a target-specific use e.g. in EXTRA_SPECS (with %(subtarget_cpp_spec) included in CPP_SPEC). It's entirely possible that there are some definitions that are in fact unused because those architectures lack such code to use them.. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com