https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889

--- Comment #20 from xur at google dot com ---
Thanks for the comments. I'll work on this to get it fixed this time.

Let me understand your idea correctly:
We will have two patches: The first one will check FTW-API and make
the gcov-tool build configurable.
if -disable-gcov-tool is specified, we will not build gcov-tool.
if -enable-gcov-tool is specified, we will build gcov-tool
if neither specified, we will check the FTW-API and build gcovtool if
FTW-API is available.

The second patch is to emulate FTW in libiberty for MINGW32?
I'm a little confused here. libiberty is built after the configure. Do
we need to a special handling of MINGW32 in config?

Thanks,

-Rong

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 3:03 PM, ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
<gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
>
> --- Comment #19 from Kai Tietz <ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Hi Xur,
>
> I asked you in my intial support to check for existance of FTW-API, and not to
> implement it for Win32.
>
> So first, send patch checking in a valid way if API can be used.
>
> The ftw/nftw emulation you wrote seems to me more suitable for libiberty.  And
> again in most places the check for _WIN32 isn't right.  You should check
> instead for mingw-target, means for __MINGW32__ instead, as for cygwin this
> macro might be defined in some circumstances.  And make sure that you disable
> code-paths only for mingw-targets iff we don't have the FTW-API.
>
> I would suggest to make out this patch 2 separate patches.
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to