linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: -mcpu vs. binutils 2.13.90.0.18

To: Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de>
Subject: Re: -mcpu vs. binutils 2.13.90.0.18
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 13:39:30 +0200 (MET DST)
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20030514184256.GE8833@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de>
Organization: Technical University of Gdansk
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Wed, 14 May 2003, Thiemo Seufer wrote:

> >  Of course the choice of the default should be configurable (for binutils
> > it probably already is
> 
> It isn't, and probably will never be. Of course you could introduce
> just another configuration, with the bfd vector of your choice as
> default.

 Hmm, I would assume "mipsn32*-linux" defaults to n32 and "mips64*-linux" 
-- to (n)64.  It isn't the case, indeed.

> > -- I recall Richard Sandiford making changes in
> > this area, for gcc -- no idea).
> 
> It would also need a different config which defines a different
> MIPS_DEFAULT_ABI.

 I will do the change as described above when I am working on mips64
glibc.  Also config.guess will probably have to be updated to be capable
to determine which one of these two configurations is used in a given
system, so that one need not specify "--build=" to get what is desired.

-- 
+  Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland   +
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
+        e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available        +


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>