* 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).