Re: CVS Update@linux-mips.org: linux

[Thiemo Seufer <ths@networkno.de>]

Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> 
> > > They are not in the info pages, but that should probably be considered an 
> > > accidental omission.  Is using something that's documented but doesn't 
> > > work, to the contrary, any better?
> > 
> > Probably not. It's just that I've never seen actual use of -mel/-meb yet.
> 
>  Good -- it means you haven't been watching over my shoulder. ;-)  I've 
> used them several times for big-endian builds with my toolchain, which, as 
> you may be aware, has been exclusively little-endian so far.
> 
>  And they are actually used to implement these "-EL" and "-EB" options.  
> Frankly I find "-mel" and "-meb" more consistent with the others as "-m*" 
> generally imply target-specific options.

Other gcc targets use IIRC -BE and -LE. It might be worthwile to document
-mel/-meb better, use them generally in gcc, and then mark the uppercase
options as deprecated.


Thiemo