[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] package/gcc: 4.8.x to 5.x: backport a fix for building gcc with gcc-6

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni at free-electrons.com> writes:

 > Hello,
 > On Mon, 16 May 2016 06:03:48 +0200, Samuel Martin wrote:
 >> When the host system compiler is gcc-6, this patch is needed to build
 >> Buildroot toolchain and cleanly apply on gcc version 4.8.x to 5.x (not
 >> needed for 4.7.x series).
 >> 
 >> Signed-off-by: Samuel Martin <s.martin49 at gmail.com>
 >> 
 >> ---
 >> changes v1->v2:
 >> - rename patches {ThomasP)
 >> ---
 >> package/gcc/4.8.5/130-fix_build_with_gcc-6.patch   | 153 +++++++++++++++++++++
 >> package/gcc/4.9.3/130-fix_build_with_gcc-6.patch   | 153 +++++++++++++++++++++
 >> package/gcc/5.3.0/130-fix_build_with_gcc-6.patch   | 153 +++++++++++++++++++++
 >> .../gcc/arc-2015.12/130-fix_build_with_gcc-6.patch | 153 +++++++++++++++++++++
 >> 4 files changed, 612 insertions(+)
 >> create mode 100644 package/gcc/4.8.5/130-fix_build_with_gcc-6.patch
 >> create mode 100644 package/gcc/4.9.3/130-fix_build_with_gcc-6.patch
 >> create mode 100644 package/gcc/5.3.0/130-fix_build_with_gcc-6.patch
 >> create mode 100644 package/gcc/arc-2015.12/130-fix_build_with_gcc-6.patch

 > Thanks for this new iteration, looks good. Now, I'm wondering whether I
 > should apply this to master or to next.

 > It really is a build fix, so master is normally appropriate. However:

 >  1/ It is touching really a core component, gcc, so we should be more
 >     conservative than for other packages.

 >  2/ There are probably tons of other host packages that don't yet build
 >     with gcc 6, so we might as well decide that Buildroot 2016.05 is
 >     not gcc 6 compatible, and to make it a goal for Buildroot 2016.08
 >     to support gcc 6 on the host.

 > Opinions welcome.

I also would prefer to err on the side of caution. From IRC I see that
so far only Arch has moved to gcc6 by default, so I think we should only
add it in next.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard