Thanks Paolo for your explanations, things are getting much clearer! > I volunteer to check if there is support for > --enable-multilib=libstdc++-v3,libjava and if not add it. Unfortunately, > --disable-multilib=ada cannot work (because --disable-xxx is the same as > --enable-multilib=no).
Does that mean that libgcc is implicitely multilibed if --enable-multilib= is used ? > As an alternative, people that don't want multilibbed libada can not use > libada altogether. More on this in a second. Still not clear to me what you mean here. > Note that Laurent commented out install-gnatlib in ada/Make-lang.in. I > agree though that it doesn't hurt to keep those targets, and I think that > this hunk should not be included. Agreed. > I guess everything will be more clear after the above: gcc/ada/Makefile.in > is not changed, and both gcc/ada/Make-lang.in (once Laurent undoes that > hunk) and libada/Makefile.in invoke it. Indeed, now things are clearer, thanks. >> +ifeq ($(strip $(filter-out %x86_64 linux%,$(arch) $(osys))),) >> + ifeq ($(strip $(MULTISUBDIR)),/32) >> + arch:=i686 >> + endif >> +endif > > Just $(filter-out %x86_64, $(arch)). No need to check for linux too, the > /32 multilib name is pretty common. Right. > The same should be enough for both powerpc64 and sparc64. I'd feel more confortable with ppc, sparc and x86 covered indeed, rather than just x86* Arno
