Re: HEADS UP: plan to switch many ports over to GCC 12 soon

["David H. Gutteridge" <david%gutteridge.ca@localhost>]

On Tue, 2024-06-25 at 13:29 +0200, Christoph Badura wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 08:28:48PM -0400, David H. Gutteridge wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 at 15:07:41 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> > > Christoph Badura <bad%bsd.de@localhost> writes:
> > > > diff --git a/external/gpl3/gcc/usr.bin/host-libcpp/Makefile
> > > > b/external/gpl3/gcc/usr.bin/host-libcpp/Makefile
> > > > index 77ea9e0b2ba..e7968c85f55 100644
> > > > +.if ${HAVE_GCC} > 10
> > > > +HOST_CXXFLAGS+=		-std=c++11
> > > > +.endif
> 
> > > I'm not really comfortable with this being conditional.
> > If you're referring here to ".if ${HAVE_GCC} > 10", that definitely
> > needs to be conditional. HAVE_GCC refers to the version of GCC being
> > built as a tool, not the version of the host compiler in use.
> 
> Meanwhile I've come to the conclusion that this should not be
> conditional
> on "HAVE_GCC > 10".  This is in src/external/gpl3/gcc which *is*
> gcc12.
> Hence there is no reason to make this conditional.

Ah, yes, sorry. I was thinking of my own patch. Here that test should
be redundant, makes sense.

(I think there are four different email threads across three mailing
lists touching on this general subject. I lost track of what's what,
in the discussion of "should 'std' be forced?")

Dave