This is the mail archive of the gcc-help@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]

AW: gcc -m32 -dumpmachine

From: "Warlich, Christof" <christof dot warlich at siemens dot com>
To: "Warlich, Christof" <christof dot warlich at siemens dot com>, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
Cc: "gcc-help (gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org)" <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:27:40 +0000
Subject: AW: gcc -m32 -dumpmachine
References: <6D83E89737156549AEA25EF9ED712C5D2E5615@DEFTHW99EK1MSX.ww902.siemens.net> <CAH6eHdQ92pYgr0w+d3beWrbpbUuZZs0dOPjtfYicoAMxroBg=Q@mail.gmail.com> <6D83E89737156549AEA25EF9ED712C5D2E5683@DEFTHW99EK1MSX.ww902.siemens.net>

> > > But anyhow, is there any other way to obtain the target triplet (or at least the target processor that gcc would actually build for, depending on the switches being passed?

> > gcc -m32 -Q --help=target | fgrep -- -march

> Many thanks, that's exactly what I was asking for. :-)

Argh - I should have looked better: That's not really usable because it does not give the right result for 64 bit:

$ gcc  -Q --help=target | fgrep -- -march
-march=                               x86-64

Thus, for 64 bit we get x86-64 instead of x86_64. To me, that looks like a typo that's worth to be fixed.

Is it worth to  file a bug report for this?

Cheers,

Chris

Follow-Ups:
- Re: gcc -m32 -dumpmachine
  - From: Jonathan Wakely

References:
- gcc -m32 -dumpmachine
  - From: Warlich, Christof
- Re: gcc -m32 -dumpmachine
  - From: Jonathan Wakely
- AW: gcc -m32 -dumpmachine
  - From: Warlich, Christof

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