This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- To: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
- Cc: ebotcazou at adacore dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, jakub at redhat dot com, laurent at guerby dot net
- Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 04:32:37 -0300
- Subject: Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
- References: <or1wku4yo1.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <200702171221.35732.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <orr6sodqhz.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <200702180838.17032.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <orr6snbx8b.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <1171794073.6518.27.camel@pc2> <ormz39gtwt.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <10702201212.AA06303@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <ormz2sp2cs.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <10703051219.AA28234@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
On Mar 5, 2007, kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) wrote:
>> Couldn't the Makefiles arrange for the C parts of the Ada front end to
>> be compiled with ADAC as well?
> Yes (and I think it was), but that wasn't the source of the inconsistency,
> which was linking with a different libgcc from what compiler that built the
> Ada front end expected. And if you linked with ADAC's libgcc, then you
> wouldn't be linking with the one that the middle-end expected.
Aah, I see. So you'd have to build a separate copy of libgcc with
ADAC for everything to work. Yuck.
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}