gcc trunk target libraries do not build on Darwin 12.1

2012-08-28 Thread Nenad Vukicevic
ersion_min 10.8.1 -weak_reference_mismatches non-weak -o a.out -L/eng/upc/dev/nenad/gcc-trunk/bld/./gcc /var/folders/z7/83zx0wdj4cx644rg7p7kgwb8gn/T//cc6kpstu.o -no_compact_unwind -lSystem -lgcc_ext.10.5 -lgcc -lSystem -v -idsym -dsym collect2 version 4.8.0 20120828 (experimental) /eng/upc/dev/nenad/gc

Re: C++ conversion? Why still .c (not .cc) files and CC (not CXX) in Makefile.in?

2012-08-28 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > >> > Or do we have a rule than any file using C++ specific feature should >> > be renamed from *.c to *.cc at the moment the C++ feature goes inside? >> >> We do not have such a rule and I

Re: C++ conversion? Why still .c (not .cc) files and CC (not CXX) in Makefile.in?

2012-08-28 Thread Paul_Koning
On Aug 28, 2012, at 9:45 AM, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > >>> Or do we have a rule than any file using C++ specific feature should >>> be renamed from *.c to *.cc at the moment the C++ feature goes inside? >> >> We do not have such a rule and I

Re: C++ conversion? Why still .c (not .cc) files and CC (not CXX) in Makefile.in?

2012-08-28 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 6:45 AM, Michael Matz wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > >> > Or do we have a rule than any file using C++ specific feature should >> > be renamed from *.c to *.cc at the moment the C++ feature goes inside? >> >> We do not have such a rule and I would

Re: C++ conversion? Why still .c (not .cc) files and CC (not CXX) in Makefile.in?

2012-08-28 Thread Michael Matz
Hi, On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > Or do we have a rule than any file using C++ specific feature should > > be renamed from *.c to *.cc at the moment the C++ feature goes inside? > > We do not have such a rule and I would not recommend it. I think we > should rename all the

Re: C++ conversion? Why still .c (not .cc) files and CC (not CXX) in Makefile.in?

2012-08-28 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: > > Sorry for such a stupid question, but assuming that the GCC trunk (e.g. svn > rev 190745) > did already switch (during my holidays, so I did not follow that) to C++ > per http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-08/msg00165.html message, why

C++ conversion? Why still .c (not .cc) files and CC (not CXX) in Makefile.in?

2012-08-28 Thread Basile Starynkevitch
Hello All, Sorry for such a stupid question, but assuming that the GCC trunk (e.g. svn rev 190745) did already switch (during my holidays, so I did not follow that) to C++ per http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-08/msg00165.html message, why are files under gcc/ still keeping a .c (not a .cc) exten