This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: gcc corrections for better pie support


"Peter S. Mazinger" <ps.m@gmx.net> writes:
>
> if gcc would have the same config for all archs (at least "looking"
> the same), it would be no problem, the problem lies in the different
> approaches used to create the specs for different archs (you can
> compare it for arm and sparc for ex.)  Well, I don't want to sync
> that stuff up, because I am unable to do that ;-(

I'm not asking you to do that.  I'm just asking you to change one
thing at a time.  This is especially important since it seems Jakub
wants major revisions.


>> As a suggestion, I see that you moved definitions of __pic__ and/or
>> __PIC__ from specs strings to TARGET_CPP_OS_BUILTINS.  This is the
>> right thing to do, but it is not the perfect thing.  Those definitions
>> are, or should be, consistent across all systems, so they should be
>> handled by c-cppbuiltin.c in a generic manner.  Please consider making
>> that change instead.
>
> I have no C knowledge, so don't ask me such thing, everywhere where I have 
> done it, I have used the approach used for that specific arch (I have 
> really looked hard where to put it), and as I said, almost all archs 
> differ and put the definitions at different locations and also put them 
> into different vars.

Okay, in that case, don't worry about it.  It's probably not a safe
thing to do right now anyway.

zw


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]