From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27648 invoked by alias); 18 Dec 2002 02:44:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 27632 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 02:44:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lacrosse.corp.redhat.com) (66.187.233.200) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 02:44:42 -0000 Received: from free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (aoliva2.cipe.redhat.com [10.0.1.156]) by lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id gBI2iOY15781; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:44:24 -0500 Received: from free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gBI2iNXb020177; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:44:23 -0200 Received: (from aoliva@localhost) by free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id gBI2iHYa020171; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:44:17 -0200 To: Mark Mitchell Cc: Jan Hubicka , David Edelsohn , Zack Weinberg , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" , "libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org" , Richard Henderson Subject: Re: basic-improvements merge status References: <42170000.1040114274@warlock.codesourcery.com> From: Alexandre Oliva Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:21:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <42170000.1040114274@warlock.codesourcery.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg01104.txt.bz2 On Dec 17, 2002, Mark Mitchell wrote: >> OK, I will disable the transfromation for the moment. > Thanks; that's fine. >>> how to do the configury bits. (One possibility is explicitly flags in >>> the tm.h file.) >> >> What do you think is the correct way to handle it? > I'm not sure; I'm not a configury expert. For a native build, I'd think > we could use autoconf; for a cross-build, that's a little tougher -- but > I'd think we could still do it. There's nothing we can do, really. The compiler is often built before the C library, so it can't detect properties in it. It has to know in advance what transformations it can or cannot do. I can't see anything much different from, say, some settings in gcc/config that enable or disable some of the functions, along with perhaps some consistency check that detects functions that are present but whose transformations are disabled, or those that are missing but enabled. -- Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer