[oe] [PATCH] boost: more elaborate and correct usage of GCC atomicity.

[Koen Kooi]

On 05-11-09 17:01, Przemyslaw Wesolek wrote:
> Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Your patch seems to be based on an old (as in: the day before yesterday)
>> snapshot of OE. I added a different set of patches which do almost the
>> same, but keep proper atomic ops for armv6 and armv7a, while yours would
>> fall back to emulated atomic ops for all arm platforms.
>
> Great. But I see that my change:
>
>>> diff --git a/recipes/boost/files/atomic_count_gcc_atomicity.patch
>>> b/recipes/boost/files/atomic_count_gcc_atomicity.patch
>>> index 7d08e73..3b09a8a 100644
>>> --- a/recipes/boost/files/atomic_count_gcc_atomicity.patch
>>> +++ b/recipes/boost/files/atomic_count_gcc_atomicity.patch
>>> @@ -2,12 +2,15 @@ Index: boost_1_33_1/boost/detail/atomic_count_gcc.hpp
>>>    ===================================================================
>>>    --- boost_1_33_1.orig/boost/detail/atomic_count_gcc.hpp
>>> 2008-05-01 20:43:45.000000000 +0200
>>>    +++ boost_1_33_1/boost/detail/atomic_count_gcc.hpp    2008-05-01
>>> 20:43:55.000000000 +0200
>>> -@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
>>> +@@ -17,7 +17,11 @@
>>>     //  http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)
>>>     //
>>>
>>> --#include<bits/atomicity.h>
>>> ++#if __GNUC__ * 100 + __GNUC_MINOR__>= 402
>>>    +#include<ext/atomicity.h>
>>> ++#else
>>> + #include<bits/atomicity.h>
>>> ++#endif
>>>
>>>     namespace boost
>>>     {
>
> is still applicable. Shell I post a patch for this issue separately?

Yes please :)