Can we assume __thread support?

[Mike Frysinger]

On 15 Oct 2015 15:40, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > 
> > if test "$libc_cv_gcc___thread" = no; then
> >   AC_MSG_ERROR([support for the __thread keyword is required])
> > fi
> 
> As a general principle, what do people think of removing such configure 
> tests that exist only to produce errors, if we expect that versions 
> lacking support would also fail to pass the tests of minimum GCC / 
> binutils versions?  There are a *lot* of such configure tests; removing 
> them is only a minor cleanup (precisely because they don't condition 
> anything beyond an error), but I think such tests are generally pointless.  
> (Cases where current tools might plausibly fail such a test should be kept 
> - that's for exceptional cases such as the test for a compiler defaulting 
> to -march=i386, where we're testing for a bad configuration rather than a 
> bad version.)

punt them
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/attachments/20151015/de19c562/attachment.sig>