Re: Fix GCC_LINUX_FUTEX to work with C99 compilers

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fix GCC_LINUX_FUTEX to work with C99 compilers

Jonathan Wakely-3
On 06/09/19 10:57 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:

>Without this change, libstdc++ is built without futex symbols if GCC
>rejects implicit function declarations in default mode.
>
>Thanks,
>Florian
>
>config/ChangeLog:
>
>2019-09-06  Florian Weimer  <[hidden email]>
>
> * futex.m4 (GCC_LINUX_FUTEX): Include <unistd.h> for the syscall
> function.
>
>libgomp/ChangeLog, libitm/ChangeLog, libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>
>2019-09-06  Florian Weimer  <[hidden email]>
>
> * configure: Regenerate.

I can't approve the top-level part but it's OK from the libstdc++ side
(for release branches too if desired).



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fix GCC_LINUX_FUTEX to work with C99 compilers

Jeff Law
On 9/6/19 2:57 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:

> Without this change, libstdc++ is built without futex symbols if GCC
> rejects implicit function declarations in default mode.
>
> Thanks,
> Florian
>
> config/ChangeLog:
>
> 2019-09-06  Florian Weimer  <[hidden email]>
>
> * futex.m4 (GCC_LINUX_FUTEX): Include <unistd.h> for the syscall
> function.
>
> libgomp/ChangeLog, libitm/ChangeLog, libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>
> 2019-09-06  Florian Weimer  <[hidden email]>
>
> * configure: Regenerate.
Do you think it's worthwhile for me to pause the builder, update the
compiler with this patch and restart stuff that's failed?  It's not hard
to do.

jeff

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fix GCC_LINUX_FUTEX to work with C99 compilers

Florian Weimer-5
* Jeff Law:

> On 9/6/19 2:57 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Without this change, libstdc++ is built without futex symbols if GCC
>> rejects implicit function declarations in default mode.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Florian
>>
>> config/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2019-09-06  Florian Weimer  <[hidden email]>
>>
>> * futex.m4 (GCC_LINUX_FUTEX): Include <unistd.h> for the syscall
>> function.
>>
>> libgomp/ChangeLog, libitm/ChangeLog, libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2019-09-06  Florian Weimer  <[hidden email]>
>>
>> * configure: Regenerate.

> Do you think it's worthwhile for me to pause the builder, update the
> compiler with this patch and restart stuff that's failed?  It's not hard
> to do.

Yes, I think it's absolutely necessary.  Anything Qt-related fails to
build right now, and many more C++ programs are affected

Would it help if I backport the patches to the GCC 9 branch?  Or do you
just want to stick it to the existing implicit function declaration
patch?

Thanks,
Florian