Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 09:31:49 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: gcc-4.7.0-RC-20120302 fails to build for i686-pc-cygwin
Message-ID: <20120322133149.GB10643@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <4F575A90 DOT 8060201 AT cs DOT utoronto DOT ca> <20120307130723 DOT GB14210 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4F5763D9 DOT 8030602 AT cs DOT utoronto DOT ca> <4F5764E3 DOT 8090004 AT gmail DOT com> <20120322072533 DOT GA2948 AT qp9482>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120322072533.GA2948@qp9482>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 08:25:09AM +0100, Denis Excoffier wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 01:38:43PM +0000, Dave Korn wrote:
>>> On 07/03/2012 13:34, Ryan Johnson wrote:
>>> > On 07/03/2012 8:07 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> >> On Mar  7 07:54, Ryan Johnson wrote:
>>> >>> Hi all,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I tried to bootstrap the gcc-4.7 RC and it fails because it expects
>>> >>> to find<process.h>  and the file actually lives in
>>> >>> <cygwin/process.h>  (see
>>> >>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52513).
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I'm asking here because the gcc devs thought this would mean 4.6 is
>>> >>> broken as well, but I have 4.6.2 running. Did process.h perhaps move
>>> >>> between 1.7.10 and 1.7.11? I guess configure must be using linker
>>> >>> rather than preprocessor tests for presence of spawnve, because it
>>> >>> thinks (correctly) that the function exists.
>>> >> See http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2012-02/msg00041.html
>>> >> We moved it back.  If you have it in cygwin/process.h, you didn't
>>> >> update from 1.7.10 to 1.7.11.
>>> > Ah, I do remember that, now that you mention, but I was running a 1.7.11
>>> > snapshot and forgot to upgrade...
>>> > 
>>> > Thanks for the quick reply,
>>> > Ryan
>>> 
>>>   Thanks for spotting that Ryan.  FTR, I figure it's not worth delaying the
>>> GCC release to add a fix to support .10, since there were other significant
>>> problems with it, and anyone who has it should be moving to .11 anyway.
>>> 
>
>Perhaps we could nevertheless find a means to move <process.h>
>into <cygwin/process.h>, while not breaking GCC compilation during
>the mean time? A patch to GCC-4.8 to search first for <cygwin/process.h>
>and <process.h> if not found? And, for Cygwin,
>cp -p cygwin/process.h process.h? SHTDI.

Why are we still talking about this?  We moved the header file back
where it has been for a decade or more.  The case is now closed.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple