Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:29:24 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: rittle@labs.mot.com Cc: nork@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Fix -pthread issue on lang/gcc3[34] Message-ID: <20050113032924.GB36950@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <200501122031.j0CKVxjP084836@latour.waar.labs.mot.com> References: <200501081657.j08GvnML053109@sakura.ninth-nine.com> <Pine.BSF.4.61.0501092352441.75733@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <200501122031.j0CKVxjP084836@latour.waar.labs.mot.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 02:31:59PM -0600, Loren James Rittle wrote: > In article <Pine.BSF.4.61.0501092352441.75733@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>, > Gerald Pfeifer<gerald@pfeifer.com> writes: > > [...] > > David, Loren, how shall we proceed? I believe David raised issues wrt. > > cross-compilation which would render the #ifdefs unsuitable for upstream. > > Would a configure option, which is then used by the FreeBSD ports, be an > > option? > > >> Index: gcc33/Makefile > >> Index: gcc34/Makefile > [...] > > David already patched both mainline and 3.4 branch on FSF. > > Thus, I think it is OK to have an equivalent port patch at least until > you start to use an FSF release with the patch. I didn't check > closely to see if this proposed port patch was exactly what David > installed on the FSF tree. What is in the FSF tree is the best we can do given the existing framework and cross-build requirements. The FreeBSD Ports Collection does not support cross-builds (either arch or OS); so I am able to commit something more exact there. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050113032924.GB36950>