Openembedded Core Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc-4.6: Let G++ relocate gxx-include-dir when using --sysroot option
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:16:59 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1323951419.4568.17.camel@ted> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMKF1sqLHP1cWfBswrqnwhAPj4Tt3XCV8GpQv7Dm71PX3F=rAw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, 2011-12-14 at 07:49 -0800, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 2:02 AM, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > Hi Khem,
> >
> > What's puzzling me is that reading through this patch, we already do
> > what this patch is doing?
> >
> > Where is the difference which this patch is fixing?
> >
> 
> this does essentially what we were doing earlier but this one is going
> to go upstream

Yes, that is good and I'm fine with the patch for that reason.

> 
> > I appreciate that patch adds in the prefix to the --with-gxx-include-dir
> > option but it then removes it again during configure so this should be a
> > null op. Both versions of the patch set the "1" bit in gcc/cppdefault.c.
> >
> > So where is the change this patch makes which fixes things?
> 
> changing --with-gxx-include-dir to be within sysroot triggers the
> relocation code.

But we were already triggering the relocation code?

I can't see *any* functionality difference between these, they should
both just give the same result as far as I can tell...

Claiming it fixes things is therefore concerning me.

Cheers,

Richard




  reply	other threads:[~2011-12-15 12:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-12-14  8:28 [PATCH] gcc-4.6: Let G++ relocate gxx-include-dir when using --sysroot option Khem Raj
2011-12-14 10:02 ` Richard Purdie
2011-12-14 15:49   ` Khem Raj
2011-12-15 12:16     ` Richard Purdie [this message]
2011-12-16 21:24       ` Khem Raj
2011-12-20  9:07         ` Martin Jansa
2011-12-20  9:37           ` Martin Jansa
2011-12-20 16:15             ` Martin Jansa
2011-12-20 17:45               ` Khem Raj
2011-12-14 18:08   ` Ulf Samuelsson
2011-12-14 18:38     ` Khem Raj
2011-12-20  6:36       ` Eric Bénard
2011-12-20 19:59         ` Khem Raj
2011-12-21 14:23           ` Eric Bénard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1323951419.4568.17.camel@ted \
    --to=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox