http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #51 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-03 17:56:29 UTC --- (In reply to comment #49) > (In reply to comment #46) > > (In reply to comment #45) > > > Then I think we have to disable __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT > > > unconditionally > > > on darwin. > > > > I hope not. > > putting -mmacosx-version-min=10.6 - will cause the macro value to be 1060 - > > so > > defeating it. One would not expect it to run on 10.7. > > So using -mmacosx-version-min=10.6 without also using the 10.6 SDK is pilot > error? if you are relying on system features that are not the same on different versions, then yes. > But if I understand correctly, 10.6 didn't define > PTHREAD_MUTEX_RECURSIVE_INITIALIZER anyway, so using the 10.6 SDK would cause > it to be undefined, so why not just disable __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT > unconditionally? > > The only system that defines it (10.7) can't use it. OK. I'd missed that - in which case no objection to the unconditional disable from me. > > If one puts -mmacosx-version-min=10.6 and sysroots to the 10.6 SDK - *and* > > then transfers the executable to a 10.6 system - then that should work. If > > not, then I agree. > > Presumably it doesn't even need to be transferred to a 10.6 system, using the > 10.6 SDK should mean the headers don't have the static initializer, so the > pthread_mutex_init_function() will always be used to create a recursive mutex, > and Greg says that works on 10.7 Well, in this case you would bypass your test, but use the older header (notwithstanding issues of run-time vs config time) - so, yes, I suppose it would work in principle.
