On 01.02.2018 19:48, Christos Zoulas wrote: > In article <89bf59b6-1487-2041-3979-e1e84d336140%gmx.com@localhost>, > Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost> wrote: >> -=-=-=-=-=- >> -=-=-=-=-=- >> >> I propose to merge the following patch: >> >> http://netbsd.org/~kamil/patch-00043-gcc-sanitizer-headers.txt >> >> It addresses reports such as: >> "Missing headers in distribution for GCC sanitizers" >> http://gnats.netbsd.org/52265 >> >> There is an option to install all the headers available regardless of >> the support quality. This applies for example for lsan_interface.h. >> >> Another option is to install the headers only for those ports that are >> supported. This means that future msan_interface.h will land amd64, but >> not i386. And asan_interface.h could be removed from e.g. atari. >> >> I propose a patch installing all headers for sanitizers that are >> supported on any of the ports. The size of files is relatively small - >> 36K (allocator_interface.h, asan_interface.h, common_interface_defs.h >> tsan_interface_atomic.h). This is a cost of preventing an introduction >> of a per-port switch. > > Why are you doing that in gcc.old and not gcc? > > christos > gcc.old is the currently default one GCC in HEAD, I will add the same code in gcc afterwards.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature