[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFT PATCH v4 0/8] Sysroot series
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: [RFT PATCH v4 0/8] Sysroot series |
Date: |
Sun, 1 Aug 2010 19:22:37 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-04-22) |
* Paolo Bonzini wrote on Sun, Aug 01, 2010 at 04:47:26PM CEST:
> This should, and I say "should" :) pass all tests.
Thanks for the repost. Did anything change beside the discussion
attached to the last patch series post?
This passes for me on GNU/Linux with a non sysrooted GCC. How come
there is no testsuite coverage for --with-sysroot for such compilers
though? Is that option not usable in that case?
Cheers,
Ralf
- [PATCH] Do not absolutize paths eagerly., (continued)
- [PATCH] Do not absolutize paths eagerly., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/20
- Re: [PATCH] Do not absolutize paths eagerly., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/21
- Re: [PATCH] Do not absolutize paths eagerly., Charles Wilson, 2010/08/21
- Re: [PATCH] Do not absolutize paths eagerly., Paolo Bonzini, 2010/08/22
- Re: [PATCH] Do not absolutize paths eagerly., Paolo Bonzini, 2010/08/22
[RFT PATCH v4 2/8] add --with-sysroot, Paolo Bonzini, 2010/08/01
[RFT PATCH v4 1/8] handle sysroot flags, Paolo Bonzini, 2010/08/01
[RFT PATCH v4 7/8] add sysroot test, Paolo Bonzini, 2010/08/01
[RFT PATCH v4 8/8] initial version of the NEWS entry, Paolo Bonzini, 2010/08/01
[RFT PATCH v4 5/8] process postdeps to include sysrooted paths, Paolo Bonzini, 2010/08/01
Re: [RFT PATCH v4 0/8] Sysroot series,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
Re: [RFT PATCH v4 0/8] Sysroot series, Charles Wilson, 2010/08/01
Re: [RFT PATCH v4 0/8] Sysroot series, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/01