On Wed, 16 Jul 2014, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > > This seems weird. Why wasn't this file included before or whenever it
> > > was added for other *-linux targets? This seems to define SPECs that
> > > should have been necessary before now.
>
> This was comitted by Joseph with revision 168711 and s
On Sat, 2014-07-26 at 06:24 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > * config.gcc (powerpc*-*-linux*): Include gnu-user.h in tm_file.
> > * config/rs6000/sysv4.h (CC!_SPEC): Undefine it before defining it.
> > * config/rs6000/
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 15:06 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 11:23 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> > > This seems weird. Why wasn't this file included bef
On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 15:06 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 11:23 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > > This seems weird. Why wasn't this file included before or whenever it
> > > was added for other *-linux target
On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 11:23 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > This seems weird. Why wasn't this file included before or whenever it
> > was added for other *-linux targets? This seems to define SPECs that
> > should have been necessa
On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 11:23 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > > This passed bootstrap and regtesting on powerpc64-linux with no
> > > regressions.
> > > Ok for mainline?
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > * config.gcc (powerpc*-*-l
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > This passed bootstrap and regtesting on powerpc64-linux with no regressions.
> > Ok for mainline?
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > * config.gcc (powerpc*-*-linux*): Include gnu-user.h in tm_file.
> > * config/rs6000/sysv4.h (C
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> With a recent libsanitizer merge from upstream, we're now seeing a lot
> of ASAN test suite failures with the following error:
>
> ==26426==ASan runtime does not come first in initial library list; you
> should
> either link runtime to y
With a recent libsanitizer merge from upstream, we're now seeing a lot
of ASAN test suite failures with the following error:
==26426==ASan runtime does not come first in initial library list; you should
either link runtime to your application or manually preload it with
LD_PRELOAD.
This is c
