On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov <ma...@codesourcery.com> > wrote: > >> I think this patch will break MIPS Android build due to mismatch of >> ElfW(type) when _MIPS_SZPTR == 64. I think the right way to fix this is to >> make Bionic export link.h or already-existing linker.h, but I differ to Ian >> for final judgement. > > I think it would be better to export <link.h>. I don't know how > feasible that is or how long it would take to become available.
Pavel, how long does it take to export <link.h> for Android/x86? >> FWIW, I'm OK with using hard-coded definitions if link.h is absent, and >> using definitions from link.h if it is there. I.e., >> >> #ifdef HAVE_LINK_H >> # include <link.h> >> #else >> <YOUR PATCH> >> #endif > > This is conceptually fine as long as we are clear that we are testing > for the presence of link.h on the target, not the host. It can be > hard for libgcc to reliably test for the presence of target-specific > header files. > That is also my concern. -- H.J.
