This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: m68k - Dropping the Motorola syntax
On Tuesday 19 August 2003 10:24, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Ian Lance Taylor <email@example.com> writes:
> |> Using Motorola syntax is necessary from the gcc point of view, because
> |> for some reason gcc appears to only emit @PLTPC, etc., if MOTOROLA is
> |> defined.
> The original m68k PIC generation was designed for Sun3/a.out, which only
> worked with Sun as, not with GNU as, AFAIK. This was using MIT syntax,
> probably because Sun as does only grok that. Now that support for Sun3
> has been removed it would be possible to also remove support for non-ELF
> PIC, so that PIC support is independent of the assembler dialect.
But, afaik, NetBSD always had shared libraries built with -fPIC on a.out
ports, which used the MIT syntax. PIC for .so modules wasn't optional as in
Linux that can use COW on mmap()'ed memory to relocate code differently
for each process address space.
So I wonder, how could they use the MIT syntax _and_ PIC at the same
time if it wasn't supported by GCC?
// Bernardo Innocenti - Develer S.r.l., R&D dept.
Please don't send Word attachments - http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html