This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] sparc64-linux multilibs
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparc64-linux multilibs
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 13:37:08 -0800
- Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at egcs dot cygnus dot com
- References: <19991207122923.X515@mff.cuni.cz>
On Tue, Dec 07, 1999 at 12:29:23PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> That would mean 6 different types of multilibs
> (64bit, 64bit no-app-regs, 64bit cmodel != medlow,
> 64bit no-appregs + cmodel != medlow, 32bit, 32bit no-app-regs).
> That seemed too much for me, so I have modified a little bit genmultilib to
> accept a new syntax and now I can have just 4 types of multilibs:
> (64bit, 64bit with no-app-regs or cmodel != medlow or both, 32bit, 32bit
> no-app-regs).
Is there any point to building no-app-regs versions of libgcc?
The C++ libraries I would expect most folks to use shared objects;
we'd do the same for fortran if we put the effort in. And for
shared objects we must of course use -mapp-regs.
r~