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.
