From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from albireo.enyo.de (albireo.enyo.de [37.24.231.21]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB9AA395B081 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 20:48:27 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org AB9AA395B081 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=deneb.enyo.de Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fw@deneb.enyo.de Received: from [172.17.203.2] (helo=deneb.enyo.de) by albireo.enyo.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1jTtd2-0000ME-4g; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 20:48:24 +0000 Received: from fw by deneb.enyo.de with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jTtd2-00020d-0K; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:48:24 +0200 From: Florian Weimer To: Jeff Law via Libffi-discuss Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" , law@redhat.com, Mike Stump , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Ian Lance Taylor , Chung-Lin Tang Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 GCC] libffi/test: Fix compilation for build sysroot References: <7d67eb66e65632ab1fce66ba07a8aa3e6090953d.camel@redhat.com> <10b639b335a1f9a064a40410f79fe4c0ba9b749e.camel@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:48:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: <10b639b335a1f9a064a40410f79fe4c0ba9b749e.camel@redhat.com> (Jeff Law via Libffi-discuss's message of "Wed, 29 Apr 2020 11:14:35 -0600") Message-ID: <87a72uggrr.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, 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: libffi-discuss@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libffi-discuss mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 20:48:28 -0000 * Jeff Law via Libffi-discuss: > FWIW, I'm expecting Florian to be digging into some libffi stuff > relatively soon and once those issues are ironed out, there'll be a > push for a libffi upstream release -- which seems like a good place > to re-sync GCC to the upstream libffi master. I'm not going to work on the master branch for now, so this should not impact the release. The goal is specifically to support more hardware for legacy binaries with the old libffi.so.6 soname.