This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Cleanups for the m68k backend

From: Jim Wilson <wilson at tuliptree dot org>
To: Bernardo Innocenti <bernie at develer dot com>
Cc: Franz Sirl <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>, Andreas Schwab<schwab at suse dot de>, "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:53:36 -0700
Subject: Re: Cleanups for the m68k backend
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20030707151505.0432c008@mail.lauterbach.com> <200307081146.04150.bernie@develer.com> <20030708125113.GA20752@lorien.int.gecko.de> <200307081739.26760.bernie@develer.com>

Bernardo Innocenti wrote:

Who is using m68020-*-elf*?

Probably no one. Keep in mind that gcc isn't the only program that uses these configure names. There is also binutils, gdb, newlib, etc. However, I don't see support for m68020-elf in all of them, and a quick uberbaum tree confirms this. So m68020-elf isn't useful anymore and can be eliminated.

I think the point of having m68020-elf was so that we could have a target that defaults to m68020 code instead of one that defaults to m68000 code. In current sources, a better way to do this is via --with-cpu configure options.

Could we drop it and rename "m68020-elf.h"
to "m68k-elf.h"

It would be very reasonable to do this.

Jim

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cleanups for the m68k backend
  - From: Zack Weinberg

References:
- Re: Cleanups for the m68k backend
  - From: Franz Sirl
- Re: Cleanups for the m68k backend
  - From: Bernardo Innocenti
- Re: Cleanups for the m68k backend
  - From: Gunther Nikl
- Re: Cleanups for the m68k backend
  - From: Bernardo Innocenti

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