Re: Split up toplevel library-disabling cases

On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, Michael Eager wrote: > > Target maintainers: I'd like to understand why it is necessary to > > disable libssp for AVR, AIX and Microblaze > > I believe that at some time in the past libssp failed to build for > MicroBlaze, but I don't recall the details. It currently builds >

Re: Split up toplevel library-disabling cases

Joseph S. Myers wrote: This patch, relative to a tree with (pending review) applied, continues toplevel configure cleanup by splitting the disabling of some libraries into separate case statements for those libraries. Separating the logic

Re: Split up toplevel library-disabling cases

As Weddington, Eric wrote: > > Target maintainers: I'd like to understand why it is necessary to > > disable libssp for AVR, AIX and Microblaze, and libstdc++-v3 for AVR > > (and what use C++ is on AVR without libstdc++-v3 - do you use another > > C++ library?). [...] > Regarding the AVR port, AF

Re: Split up toplevel library-disabling cases

* Joseph S. Myers wrote on Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 01:40:47AM CEST: > OK to commit (both the previous patch this is based on, and this one)? Build system aspects of the patch are fine with me. Thanks for pursuing this, Ralf > 2011-03-31 Joseph Myers > > * configure.ac: Separate cases disa

RE: Split up toplevel library-disabling cases

m; > ae...@post.ru; Weddington, Eric; dje@gmail.com; ea...@eagercon.com > Subject: Split up toplevel library-disabling cases > > Target maintainers: I'd like to understand why it is necessary to > disable libssp for AVR, AIX and Microblaze, and libstdc++-v3 for AVR > (a

Split up toplevel library-disabling cases

This patch, relative to a tree with (pending review) applied, continues toplevel configure cleanup by splitting the disabling of some libraries into separate case statements for those libraries. Separating the logic like this brings things