2011/6/1 Richard Henderson <r...@redhat.com>: > On 06/01/2011 09:01 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> The problem with this approach is that some of the macros tested only >> live in gcc, not libgcc once the libgcc sources no longer include tm.h >> etc. E.g. look at i386/mingw32.h: >> >> #if !TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT && !defined (TARGET_BI_ARCH) >> #define MD_UNWIND_SUPPORT "config/i386/w32-unwind.h" >> #endif >> >> Both TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT and TARGET_BI_ARCH live in gcc only, so at >> least in the medium term, we need different tests here. > > For this specific case, surely neither isn't relevant. > Surely the proper test, in the target header, is simply > > #ifndef __MINGW64__ > > as one would write in normal user-level code. > > > r~
Yes, thanks. Well, we would loose here the ability to build for mingw-w64 dw2 support for 32-bit (to be compatible to mingw.org's 32-bit variant, as they want to use this dw2 unwinder), but mingw-w64 doesn't want dw2-unwind in general, as dw2-unwind has some issues about throwing of VC generated code. So this test might be ok too. Regards, Kai
