From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F0FBC4828D for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:25:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A59E61233; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:25:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 7A59E61233 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wA6qPJzfbSRy; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:25:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ash.osuosl.org (ash.osuosl.org [140.211.166.34]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E925D6113F; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:25:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org E925D6113F Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by ash.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7E891BF311 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:25:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569BF41E42 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:25:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 569BF41E42 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vdD3TmujagcJ for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:25:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay7-d.mail.gandi.net (relay7-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.200]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E07CE408FC for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:25:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org E07CE408FC Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0969120007; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:25:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 17:25:40 +0100 To: Vincent Fazio Message-ID: <20240206172540.2d1ed291@windsurf> In-Reply-To: References: <20240206161152.0e178414@windsurf> <20240206155413.1349720-1-giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> Organization: Bootlin X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.2.0 (GTK 3.24.38; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-GND-Sasl: thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com X-Mailman-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=gm1; t=1707236742; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=oADcK4GqKZee1lbe+EMd3egY9baJ7wi/+JZS4KRgzOE=; b=nE49CGMt8DlHozlN53kxy0J2Ow2qsVngeN1tPmBUkIUD52Tt/t1ZgODbk66Y33Fx6cTgg4 ugZbgVJeYP+O/7Sg/5OXSk6UUwisUTuOrqqSnqz5fJvcqotR/AAkpSv14tWOWUaOKV//nI 4pB+wQCwRvHdlqfFqp1sg3x0unMvpcj3m1T3swF+RZ/BoSMvCRxX2iKK2822Cx/VnOzMGe MLfEdKnenxcTg/DXngiQ3OE/MOHCOt4tvzvKf+oFGx/R7+SCuQetgtvgCIUZucvMawzc07 bpYcx2C6eT+xVT6b8r6i8nk/YMPokRszh+oAyPjSTLdzUWp/5gD9klNeJ9DZKg== X-Mailman-Original-Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=gm1 header.b=nE49CGMt Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [External] - [PATCH] package/attr: fix build failure on Microblaze architecture X-BeenThere: buildroot@buildroot.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion and development of buildroot List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot Reply-To: Thomas Petazzoni Cc: Giulio Benetti , Fabrice Fontaine , "buildroot@buildroot.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: buildroot-bounces@buildroot.org Sender: "buildroot" Hello Vincent, On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:05:31 +0000 Vincent Fazio wrote: > Would it make sense to patch GCC for Microblaze to address these at > the compiler level instead of constantly patching the packages? > > I tested https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101766#c6 back > when we were solving this problem for xz and had no issues > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2023-March/240834.html It would definitely make sense of course. Have you been able to get the necessary changes accepted in upstream GCC ? Thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training https://bootlin.com _______________________________________________ buildroot mailing list buildroot@buildroot.org https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot