Maybe this is my misunderstanding, I assume "Pending" means a patch has been also sent to gcc developers it is going to be upstreamed at some point. (I also assume patch for 4.9 Makefile.in needs to be upstreamed separately from 5.2)
> -----Original Message----- > From: Khem Raj [mailto:raj.k...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2015 10:18 AM > To: Bystricky, Juro > Cc: Hatle, Mark G (Wind River); openembedded- > c...@lists.openembedded.org > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] Fix GCC 5.2 "_FOR_BUILD" and related > variables > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Bystricky, Juro <juro.bystri...@intel.com> > wrote: > > The patch works unmodified (and solves mingw build problems) for gcc > > 4.9. as well, providing gcc-4.9.inc is patched the same way as > > gcc-5.2.inc > > > > (However, this makes the Makefile.in patch status: > > > > Upstream-Status: Pending > > > > incorrect for case of gcc 4.9.) > > why it it incorrect. is gcc 4.9 EOL ? > > > > > > > --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.9.inc > > +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.9.inc > > @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ SRC_URI = "\ > > file://0063-nativesdk-gcc-support.patch \ > > file://0064-handle-target-sysroot-multilib.patch \ > > file://0065-gcc-483-universal-initializer-no-warning.patch \ > > + file://0042-cxxflags-for-build.patch \ > > " > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org > >> [mailto:openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On > Behalf > >> Of Mark Hatle > >> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 8:30 AM > >> To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > >> Subject: [OE-core] [PATCH] Fix GCC 5.2 "_FOR_BUILD" and related > >> variables > >> > >> Without this patch, the wrong header fragments can be used to > >> generate the nativesdk, cross-canadian, and other variations. Generally > this works fine. > >> However, when there is enough variation from the build machine to the > >> target runtime it will break.. (Such as SDKMACHINE=i686-mingw32) > >> > >> The bugs can also how up on a Linux -> Linux build, but it's > >> signficiantly more rare. It would require some set of options that > >> make the host headers and flags incompatible with the target. (Such > >> as various profiling > >> options.) > >> > >> This has been tested with a set of meta-mingw patches that will be > >> sent to the Yocto Project mailing list soon. > >> > >> Mark Hatle (1): > >> gcc-5.2: Fix various _FOR_BUILD and related variables > >> > >> meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-5.2.inc | 1 + > >> .../gcc/gcc-5.2/0042-cxxflags-for-build.patch | 123 > >> +++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 2 files changed, 124 insertions(+) > >> create mode 100644 > >> meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-5.2/0042-cxxflags-for- > >> build.patch > >> > >> -- > >> 1.9.3 > >> > >> -- > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Openembedded-core mailing list > >> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > >> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > > Openembedded-core mailing list > > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
