runtest vs. multilib.

[Jeffrey A Law]

  > So, am I just really driving the 'make check' target wrong for
  > this case, or is there a problem with it?   Is there something 
  > wrong with the way we're building this multilib target?  Is
  > this fallout from the failure I mentioned earlier of runtest
  > not recognizing this as a multilibbed target?
I'm pretty sure you don't want to try and pass multilib options
on the command line like that :-)

The trick is the process_multilib_options call, which you'll find
in unix.exp:

process_multilib_options "";

Which means no multilib options.

Compare to vr4100-ddb.exp:

process_multilib_options "-EL -msoft-float"

jeff