[Top] [All Lists]

Re: CVS linux

To: Ralf Baechle DL5RB <>
Subject: Re: CVS linux
From: Richard Sandiford <>
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 14:42:38 +0100
Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>, Thiemo Seufer <>,
In-reply-to: <> (Ralf Baechle DL5RB's message of "Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:29:59 +0100")
Mail-followup-to: Ralf Baechle DL5RB <>,"Maciej W. Rozycki" <>, Thiemo Seufer <>,,
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <20050707121235.GV1645@hattusa.textio> <> <20050707122226.GW1645@hattusa.textio> <> <>
User-agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux)
Ralf Baechle DL5RB <> writes:
> -EB / -EL are traditionally the options that all MIPS compilers including
> non-gcc compilers, seem to support.

Right.  I've always thought of them as the canonical options for gcc
as well.  I think the only reason internal compilers like cc1 have
-mel and -meb is because gcc's target options system has traditionally
required every target option to begin with "-m".  (That's no longer
a restriction in 4.1 FWIW.)

So contrary to what was said upthread, I've always treated
the omission of these options from invoke.texi as deliberate.
They're really internal compiler flags rather than user flags.
You should use -EL and -EB instead.


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