On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 02:01:11PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:01:11 +0100 (BST)
> From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <email@example.com>
> To: Thiemo Seufer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: CVS Update@linux-mips.org: linux
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> 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.
-EB / -EL are traditionally the options that all MIPS compilers including
non-gcc compilers, seem to support.