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 Tue, 2013-11-26 15:21:12 +0000, Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@embecosm.com> wrote: > On 26 November 2013 14:51, Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@lug-owl.de> wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-11-26 06:33:39 -0600, Joel Sherrill <Joel.Sherrill@OARcorp.com> wrote: > > > Was microblaze-rtems attempted? I would have expected a failure > > > like these if so. > > > > No, it wasn't. It's not on the list of targets in > > .../gcc/contrib/config-list.mk . So we'd probably add that to the > > target list I guess? I'll propose a patch later tonight (adding > > to another pending patch to config-list.mk) > > The idea if config-list.mk is not to build every conceivable target > configuration, but to give a reasonable converage of the different > target architectures and OS/library configurations so that you can > effectively test a patch with unknown target-specific impact. Is it like that? My impression is/was that people collected a list of targets they somewhat care for. With around 200 configurations, among them some that are quite similar, adding another just adds 1/2%, which I'd call neglectible. > Is there something that microblaze-rtems exposes that is not already > covered by other microblaze or rtems targets that are already included? Probably not (without having looked at what that configuration would actually pull in.) MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de +49-172-7608481 Signature of: Alles wird gut! ...und heute wirds schon ein biÃchen besser. the second :
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] |