* Unreviewed patch
@ 2002-07-25 7:34 Momchil Velikov
2002-07-25 9:24 ` Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc Joern Rennecke
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Momchil Velikov @ 2002-07-25 7:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc; +Cc: joern.rennecke
HEAD fails to build for ``sh-elf'' target.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-07/msg00433.html
~velco
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc
2002-07-25 7:34 Unreviewed patch Momchil Velikov
@ 2002-07-25 9:24 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-07-25 9:46 ` Momchil Velikov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joern Rennecke @ 2002-07-25 9:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Momchil Velikov; +Cc: gcc, dje, Zack Weinberg
Momchil Velikov wrote:
>
> HEAD fails to build for ``sh-elf'' target.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-07/msg00433.html
>
> ~velco
The sole purpose of embed-bb.c is to provide the
infrastructure for arc profiling to newlib targets, where
unfortunately, inhibit_libc is set.
How do you build a usable sh-elf compiler without newlib
in the first place?
--
--------------------------
SuperH
2430 Aztec West / Almondsbury / BRISTOL / BS32 4AQ
T:+44 1454 462330
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc
2002-07-25 9:24 ` Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc Joern Rennecke
@ 2002-07-25 9:46 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-07-25 9:51 ` Joern Rennecke
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Momchil Velikov @ 2002-07-25 9:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joern Rennecke; +Cc: gcc, dje, Zack Weinberg
>>>>> "Joern" == Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com> writes:
Joern> How do you build a usable sh-elf compiler without newlib
Joern> in the first place?
Huh ? The compiler by itself does not require newlib nor does the
produced code, right ?
~velco
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc
2002-07-25 9:46 ` Momchil Velikov
@ 2002-07-25 9:51 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-07-25 10:01 ` Momchil Velikov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joern Rennecke @ 2002-07-25 9:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Momchil Velikov; +Cc: gcc, dje, Zack Weinberg
Momchil Velikov wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Joern" == Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com> writes:
> Joern> How do you build a usable sh-elf compiler without newlib
> Joern> in the first place?
>
> Huh ? The compiler by itself does not require newlib nor does the
> produced code, right ?
It you need header files for the compiler if you compile code
that include any of them. And you need the c library if any
function of it is used.
--
--------------------------
SuperH
2430 Aztec West / Almondsbury / BRISTOL / BS32 4AQ
T:+44 1454 462330
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc
2002-07-25 9:51 ` Joern Rennecke
@ 2002-07-25 10:01 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-07-25 11:01 ` Joern Rennecke
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Momchil Velikov @ 2002-07-25 10:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joern Rennecke; +Cc: gcc, dje, Zack Weinberg
>>>>> "Joern" == Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com> writes:
Joern> Momchil Velikov wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> "Joern" == Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com> writes:
Joern> How do you build a usable sh-elf compiler without newlib
Joern> in the first place?
>>
>> Huh ? The compiler by itself does not require newlib nor does the
>> produced code, right ?
Joern> It you need header files for the compiler if you compile code
Joern> that include any of them. And you need the c library if any
Joern> function of it is used.
I can think of at least three legitimate cases:
I. Use the compiler in a freestanding environment - no libraies or
headers exist at all.
II. Build and install the libraries after building the compiler - way
more convenient than installing headers only, building the compiler,
going back and building the libraries.
III. In a cross compilation environment, the headers may not be on the
same machine.
~velco
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc
2002-07-25 10:01 ` Momchil Velikov
@ 2002-07-25 11:01 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-07-25 11:22 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-07-28 22:31 ` Richard Zidlicky
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joern Rennecke @ 2002-07-25 11:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Momchil Velikov; +Cc: gcc, dje, Zack Weinberg
Momchil Velikov wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Joern" == Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com> writes:
>
> Joern> Momchil Velikov wrote:
> >>
> >> >>>>> "Joern" == Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com> writes:
> Joern> How do you build a usable sh-elf compiler without newlib
> Joern> in the first place?
> >>
> >> Huh ? The compiler by itself does not require newlib nor does the
> >> produced code, right ?
>
> Joern> It you need header files for the compiler if you compile code
> Joern> that include any of them. And you need the c library if any
> Joern> function of it is used.
>
> I can think of at least three legitimate cases:
>
> I. Use the compiler in a freestanding environment - no libraies or
> headers exist at all.
Is there a demand for this configuration? In that case, we should
have something more fine-grained that inhibit_libc, which suppresses
the profiling support along with eprintf.
> II. Build and install the libraries after building the compiler - way
> more convenient than installing headers only, building the compiler,
> going back and building the libraries.
It's also more convenient that writing all the binaries by hand. But
still moe convenient is just to use a unified source tree and build
everything in one go.
>
> III. In a cross compilation environment, the headers may not be on the
> same machine.
Why would you want to build the libraries on a different machine than
the compiler?
--
--------------------------
SuperH
2430 Aztec West / Almondsbury / BRISTOL / BS32 4AQ
T:+44 1454 462330
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc
2002-07-25 11:01 ` Joern Rennecke
@ 2002-07-25 11:22 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-07-25 23:23 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-07-28 22:31 ` Richard Zidlicky
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Momchil Velikov @ 2002-07-25 11:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joern Rennecke; +Cc: gcc
>>>>> "Joern" == Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com> writes:
Joern> Momchil Velikov wrote:
>> I can think of at least three legitimate cases:
>>
>> I. Use the compiler in a freestanding environment - no libraies or
>> headers exist at all.
Joern> Is there a demand for this configuration? In that case, we should
Joern> have something more fine-grained that inhibit_libc, which suppresses
Joern> the profiling support along with eprintf.
I'd think disabling profiling in the environments, which do not
support stdio is prefferable to disabling the use of GCC in these
environments.
~velco
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc
2002-07-25 11:22 ` Momchil Velikov
@ 2002-07-25 23:23 ` Joern Rennecke
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joern Rennecke @ 2002-07-25 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Momchil Velikov; +Cc: gcc, gcc-patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 794 bytes --]
Momchil Velikov wrote:
> Joern> Is there a demand for this configuration? In that case, we should
> Joern> have something more fine-grained that inhibit_libc, which suppresses
> Joern> the profiling support along with eprintf.
>
> I'd think disabling profiling in the environments, which do not
> support stdio is prefferable to disabling the use of GCC in these
> environments.
Yes, but currently inhibit_libc is set automatically for all newlib
toolchains, so if we disabled profiling using inhibit_libc, profiling
would be disabled altogether for newlib toolchains. We have to get rid of
this automatic setting of inhibit_libc so that inhibit_libc actually
means somehing again.
--
--------------------------
SuperH
2430 Aztec West / Almondsbury / BRISTOL / BS32 4AQ
T:+44 1454 462330
[-- Attachment #2: dont-inhibit-newlibc --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2375 bytes --]
Thu Jul 25 22:40:05 2002 J"orn Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com>
* configure.in (inhibit_libc): For newlib, set to -Dinhibit_eprintf.
* libgcc2.c (__eprintf): Also inhibited by inhibit_eprintf.
Index: configure.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/configure.in,v
retrieving revision 1.610
diff -p -r1.610 configure.in
*** configure.in 14 Jul 2002 01:59:13 -0000 1.610
--- configure.in 25 Jul 2002 21:39:58 -0000
*************** fi
*** 1144,1157 ****
# have its own set of headers then define
# inhibit_libc
! # If this is using newlib, then define inhibit_libc in LIBGCC2_CFLAGS.
! # This prevents libgcc2 from containing any code which requires libc
! # support.
inhibit_libc=
! if [test x$host != x$target] && [test x$with_headers = x]; then
! inhibit_libc=-Dinhibit_libc
else
! if [test x$with_newlib = xyes]; then
inhibit_libc=-Dinhibit_libc
fi
fi
--- 1144,1157 ----
# have its own set of headers then define
# inhibit_libc
! # If this is using newlib, then define inhibit_libc in LIBGCC2_CFLAGS to
! # -Dinhibit_eprintf. We should not be using __eprintf because newlib
! # has its own version of assert.h
inhibit_libc=
! if [test x$with_newlib = xyes]; then
! inhibit_libc=-Dinhibit_eprintf
else
! if [test x$host != x$target] && [test x$with_headers = x]; then
inhibit_libc=-Dinhibit_libc
fi
fi
Index: libgcc2.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/libgcc2.c,v
retrieving revision 1.144
diff -p -r1.144 libgcc2.c
*** libgcc2.c 22 Jul 2002 00:15:49 -0000 1.144
--- libgcc2.c 25 Jul 2002 21:39:58 -0000
*************** __gcc_bcmp (const unsigned char *s1, con
*** 1214,1220 ****
for binary backward compatibility. Note that it is not included in
the shared version of libgcc. */
#ifdef L_eprintf
! #ifndef inhibit_libc
#undef NULL /* Avoid errors if stdio.h and our stddef.h mismatch. */
#include <stdio.h>
--- 1214,1220 ----
for binary backward compatibility. Note that it is not included in
the shared version of libgcc. */
#ifdef L_eprintf
! #if ! defined (inhibit_libc) && ! defined (inhibit_eprintf)
#undef NULL /* Avoid errors if stdio.h and our stddef.h mismatch. */
#include <stdio.h>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc
2002-07-25 11:01 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-07-25 11:22 ` Momchil Velikov
@ 2002-07-28 22:31 ` Richard Zidlicky
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Richard Zidlicky @ 2002-07-28 22:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joern Rennecke; +Cc: Momchil Velikov, gcc, dje, Zack Weinberg
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 01:41:16PM +0100, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> Momchil Velikov wrote:
> >
> > >>>>> "Joern" == Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com> writes:
> >
> > Joern> Momchil Velikov wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >>>>> "Joern" == Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com> writes:
> > Joern> How do you build a usable sh-elf compiler without newlib
> > Joern> in the first place?
> > >>
> > >> Huh ? The compiler by itself does not require newlib nor does the
> > >> produced code, right ?
> >
> > Joern> It you need header files for the compiler if you compile code
> > Joern> that include any of them. And you need the c library if any
> > Joern> function of it is used.
> >
> > I can think of at least three legitimate cases:
> >
> > I. Use the compiler in a freestanding environment - no libraies or
> > headers exist at all.
>
> Is there a demand for this configuration?
yes. Keeping everything in sync is lot of pain, right now I came
across a problem where distcc fails with '-g' option because the
remote compiler was configured for different binutils..
Richard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-07-28 8:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-07-25 7:34 Unreviewed patch Momchil Velikov
2002-07-25 9:24 ` Unreviewed patch / {PATCH] Do not override configure decision about inhibit_libc Joern Rennecke
2002-07-25 9:46 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-07-25 9:51 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-07-25 10:01 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-07-25 11:01 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-07-25 11:22 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-07-25 23:23 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-07-28 22:31 ` Richard Zidlicky
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).