This is the mail archive of the gcc@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] | |
On Sun, 2004-01-11 10:05:59 -0800, Matt Thomas <matt@3am-software.com>
wrote in message <6.0.1.1.2.20040111100346.04bf15e8@3am-software.com>:
> At 01:11 AM 1/11/2004, Richard Henderson wrote:
> >On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 07:32:54AM +0100, Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
> >> Just an idea: m68k is the only cc0 target capable of an
> >> hosted bootstrap. Is it possible that middle-end changes
> >> have subtly broken cc0 targets without anyone noticing
> >> except on the m68k?
> >Possible, yes. It wouldn't be my first guess though.
>
> VAX (a cc0 target) is also quite broken in gcc 3.4. I've been at a
> loss to figure out why. (And VAX could do a hosted bootstrap if gcc
> wasn't so broken).
I'd *love* to see VAX cured! For vax-linux, we currently use a quite
dated compiler which glibc refuses to build with...
Rumors tell me that it isn't much work to introduce vax-linux support
(after the VAX backend basically works again). I'm not really into gcc,
but where is (currently) the exact problem with VAX? Maybe I can at
least understand it:)
MfG, JBG
--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481
"Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg
fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet! | im Irak!
ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(NEW_COPYRIGHT_LAW | DRM | TCPA));
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |