From f8f817adeb6c99bc8d864391ccb0d1c13e2621ad Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Krzesimir Nowak Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2023 09:07:10 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] coreos/user-patches: Drop patches for sys-devel/gcc We are updating to gcc 12, where the issue should not be present any more. --- .../sys-devel/gcc/0001-constexpr.patch | 14 -------------- .../coreos/user-patches/sys-devel/gcc/README.md | 6 ------ 2 files changed, 20 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 sdk_container/src/third_party/coreos-overlay/coreos/user-patches/sys-devel/gcc/0001-constexpr.patch delete mode 100644 sdk_container/src/third_party/coreos-overlay/coreos/user-patches/sys-devel/gcc/README.md diff --git a/sdk_container/src/third_party/coreos-overlay/coreos/user-patches/sys-devel/gcc/0001-constexpr.patch b/sdk_container/src/third_party/coreos-overlay/coreos/user-patches/sys-devel/gcc/0001-constexpr.patch deleted file mode 100644 index 938b3d6ace..0000000000 --- a/sdk_container/src/third_party/coreos-overlay/coreos/user-patches/sys-devel/gcc/0001-constexpr.patch +++ /dev/null @@ -1,14 +0,0 @@ -The constexpr keyword is missing for a function that was invoked from -another constexpr function. Add the missing keyword. - ---- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/memory_resource.cc 2022-12-09 22:33:43.000000000 -0000 -+++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/memory_resource.cc 2023-01-25 13:14:24.025359063 -0000 -@@ -603,7 +603,7 @@ - void* pointer = nullptr; - aligned_size _M_size; - -- size_t size() const noexcept -+ constexpr size_t size() const noexcept - { - if (_M_size.value == size_t(-1)) [[unlikely]] - return size_t(-1); diff --git a/sdk_container/src/third_party/coreos-overlay/coreos/user-patches/sys-devel/gcc/README.md b/sdk_container/src/third_party/coreos-overlay/coreos/user-patches/sys-devel/gcc/README.md deleted file mode 100644 index 9a331e1e86..0000000000 --- a/sdk_container/src/third_party/coreos-overlay/coreos/user-patches/sys-devel/gcc/README.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,6 +0,0 @@ -Drop `0001-constexpr.patch` when not applicable any more. It's a weird -issue, because building the same version of the compiler worked fine -before. Maybe some patch from gcc patches is at fault here. Didn't -investigate in hope that the issue is ephemeral. Some newer version of -gcc is already marked as stable for both amd64 and arm64 in Gentoo, so -this patch will most likely be dropped next week.