Re: [PATCH 1/2] toplevel: do not make libstdc++ configure wait for libgomp
Jonathan Wakely <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gcc.patches,gmane.comp.gcc.libstdc++.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CACb0b4npp+JE5XZO8yPVyHTqTqiLR+gisqOHNyNkYwaX60U5FQ@mail.gmail.com> |
On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 at 14:56, Jeffrey Law <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 8/12/2026 7:50 AM, Kyrylo Tkachov wrote: > > > >> On 12 Aug 2026, at 15:30, Jeffrey Law <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 8/11/2026 9:24 AM, Sam James wrote: > >>> Kyrylo Tkachov <[email protected]> writes: > >>> > >>>>> On 11 Aug 2026, at 15:11, Sam James <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> <[email protected]> writes: > >>>>> > >>>>>> From: Kyrylo Tkachov <[email protected]> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> libstdc++'s configure was made to depend on libgomp's configure in 2007, when > >>>>>> GLIBCXX_ENABLE_PARALLEL decided whether to enable parallel mode by looking for > >>>>>> a configured libgomp/omp.h on disk. Since 2010 the test has instead grepped > >>>>> Could you include commit refs for these? It's nice for us who go digging > >>>>> fairly often (also makes it easier to verify this is right). > >>>> Yeah, sure. Here it is with the references in the commit message. > >>> Thank you! > >>> > >>> I can't approve it but both patches LGTM. > >> OK for the trunk. Thanks! > > Thanks, does that include patch 2 (the one that gives the biggest bootstrap gain)? Or do we want a libstdc++ for that? > Sorry I wasn't clear. Just patch #1. I'd prefer one of the libstdc++ > guys chime in on patch #2 since it's clearly in their space. I approved patch 2 as well, thanks for working on this.