ARC support, or lack thereof (was Re: [committing as obvious] Fix arc build.)

[Nathanael Nerode <neroden at twcny dot rr dot com>]

HP said:
>On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>
>> The arc-elf build currently fails, and this fixes it.  Committing as
>> obvious.  See the bug for information.
>
>Not really obvious and most likely wrong.
>
>This is a multilib target, and as such should output (e.g.)
>$(T)crtinit.o not plain crtinit.o, otherwise those files will
>only be present for the default multilib, and since the multilib
>seems to be for different endianness, I hardly think they will
>be compatible.
>
>See other multilibbed ports, for example arm/t-arm-elf and
>mmix/t-mmix.
>
>brgds, H-P

<vent>Well, it's not like I made anything worse; arc didn't build, and 
the x- stuff was broken at any rate.  ARC wasn't a multilibbed port, it 
was a nolibbed port.</vent>  Feel free to revert, of course;  I suppose 
in some ways a non-building port is better than a misbuilding port.

CC:ed to Rich as proposed ARC target maintainer.

Rich, have you been approved as ARC target maintainer yet?  If not, have 
you at least got your paperwork through yet?  

It would be nice to have a usable ARC target, but if it doesn't show up 
sometime soon, I intend to propose its removal again, and I'll 
certainly close all ARC bugs on the grounds that ARC is unmaintained.

On June 16, you said:

>I am planning to post up some of Peter Target's unintegrated(2001) 
>fixes with some tweaks very soon. This will allow GCC 3.x for the ARC 
>to build correctly at least for C. I am currently using these patches 
>on 3.2.3 with an ARC simulator and they are pretty close to ready.

It's been three weeks.  Any progress?  Since ARC support is utterly 
broken right now, I don't think patches have to be perfect, just improvements.

-- 
Nathanael Nerode  <neroden at gcc.gnu.org>
http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html