> On Aug 22, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Rainer Orth <r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Qing,
>
>> From the comments you put into PR86519, for SPARC, looks like that only
>> 32-bit sparc has the problem.
>> sparcv9 does NOT have the same issue.
>>
>> I was trying to find the string to represent 32-bit sparc target, but
>> haven’t found it.
>>
>> my guess is: sparc32*-*-*, is this correct?
>
> no, certainly not. You need to use something like sparc*-*-* && ilp32
> to catch the 32-bit multilib in both sparc-*-* and sparcv9-*-*
> configurations. This is similar to { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } && ilp32 on x86.
thanks for the info.
>
> I'm still doubtful that enumerating target after target which all fail
> the original test for unrelated reasons is the way to go, especially
> given that there are others affected besides mips and sparc.
I am not sure, either.
however, given the available directives provided in testing suite, what’s the
better solution
to this problem?
thanks.
Qing
>
> Rainer
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
