This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] Important comment update to gcc/configure.in
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: Nathanael Nerode <neroden at twcny dot rr dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, aoliva at redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 09:56:32 -0500
- Subject: Re: [patch] Important comment update to gcc/configure.in
- References: <20030314050936.GA575@doctormoo>
On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 12:09:36AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> I believe this is correct. I want review only in case I got it wrong.
>
> This clarifies the important issue of *which* assembler and linker
> we are looking for -- it's not the BUILD->BUILD, BUILD->HOST, or
> BUILD->TARGET assemblers (all of which might be used and different in
> a Canadian cross compile)... it's the HOST->TARGET one, which we can't
> always even execute.
>
> Now that I've got this clear, I believe I'll actually be able to clean
> up the related code.
Nope. Couple of subtleties here, I think. First of all, remember,
we're on BUILD right now. We can not search for anything that's
supposed to live on HOST; it might not be there. Secondly, we use this
assembler for feature tests, so we have to be able to execute it.
Generally we want a BUILD->TARGET assembler, and to make the assumption
that it will have the same features as the HOST->TARGET assembler.
Do pathnames from this search ever get embedded into GCC? If so it
probably needs to be broken up into two searches.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer