From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 280153857005 for ; Mon, 3 May 2021 14:47:22 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 280153857005 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 143ElFdw008301 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 3 May 2021 10:47:20 -0400 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 143ElFdw008301 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (192-222-157-6.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.157.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC4A31E01F; Mon, 3 May 2021 10:47:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: RFC: Changing AC_PROG_CC to AC_PROG_CC_C99 in top level configure To: Alan Modra , Jeff Law Cc: Nick Clifton , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Binutils References: <8c1b0ed9-e6f3-9c22-45c5-c2680a2a4830@polymtl.ca> <15701c5f-5653-f0e4-990a-43094d18a702@gmail.com> <20210503062825.GG22624@bubble.grove.modra.org> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: Date: Mon, 3 May 2021 10:47:15 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210503062825.GG22624@bubble.grove.modra.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Mon, 3 May 2021 14:47:16 +0000 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 May 2021 14:47:25 -0000 > Yes, I prefer the configure fix too. If we state we require C99 in > binutils then we ought to be able to use C99.. > > Nick, does the configure.ac change also need to go in all subdirs, to > support people running make in say ld/ rather than running make in the > top build dir? For GDB, it's not supported to run gdb/configure directly, you need to use the top-level configure. Is it supported from some of the other projects in the repo? I just tried with ld, it doesn't work since it depends on bfd also being built. I tried with just bfd, it doesn't work (with the default configure options at least) because it requires zlib being built. So if all projects need to go through the top-level configure script anyway, and C99 is a baseline for all projects, then having the check only in the top-level makes sense to me. Projects that have more specific requirements can have their own checks. For example, sim/ requires C11 now. Unless the C99 check at top-level somehow does not play well with the C11 check in sim/? Like if that would cause CC to be set to "gcc -std=gnu99 -std=gnu11" or something like that. Simon