On Sun, 13 Nov 2011, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Would that be improved by replacing i386 with x86?
>
> libstdc++ omits several features when built for 80386 due to the lack
> of certain atomic operations, so I think it might be useful if the
> manual used x86 to refer to the generic architecture, as opposed to
> i386 which makes me think of -march=i386.
Sure, your logic makes a lot of sense. Happy to make this change
for you.
The patch below just went in. It is the last I have for libstdc++
for now. Would you mind regenerating the HTML files from their
XML sources as we had discussed a bit ago?
Thanks,
Gerald
2011-11-27 Gerald Pfeifer <ger...@pfeifer.com>
* doc/xml/manual/using.xml (Prerequisites): Refer to x86 instead
of i386.
Index: doc/xml/manual/using.xml
===================================================================
--- doc/xml/manual/using.xml (revision 181742)
+++ doc/xml/manual/using.xml (working copy)
@@ -1269,7 +1269,7 @@
to display how ad hoc this is: On Solaris, both -pthreads and
-threads (with subtly different meanings) are honored. On OSF,
-pthread and -threads (with subtly different meanings) are
- honored. On GNU/Linux i386, -pthread is honored. On FreeBSD,
+ honored. On GNU/Linux x86, -pthread is honored. On FreeBSD,
-pthread is honored. Some other ports use other switches.
AFAIK, none of this is properly documented anywhere other than
in ``gcc -dumpspecs'' (look at lib and cpp entries).
