Roberto Bagnara wrote:
Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
But I'm not sure to understand the relation between libtool &
$(LIBTOOL) (ie @libtool@)
I will tell you what (I think) is the relation in projects using Autoconf,
Automake and Libtool.
@LIBTOOL@ is a placeholder that stands for the Libtool
Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
But I'm not sure to understand the relation between libtool & $(LIBTOOL)
(ie @libtool@)
Any clues?
Hi Basile,
I will tell you what (I think) is the relation in projects using Autoconf,
Automake and Libtool.
@LIBTOOL@ is a placeholder that stands for the Libtool m
> I thought that RTL represented something close to the target machine,
> but not machine-dependent. I firstly thought that the output of the
> middle-end was an RTL machine-independent representation, to which is
> applied a few low-optimization machine-independent passes, and after
> that is tran
On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 16:56 +1100, Schmave wrote:
> Hi I would luke to know what I need to do to port gcc to a new
> architecture
You can start by reading the GCC internals documentation:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/
You can also look at the source code, in particular, the gcc/confi
Hi I would luke to know what I need to do to port gcc to a new
architecture
Thanks
Hi i was wondering what steps i need to take to port gcc to a new
architecture
thanks!
On 3/9/08 7:26 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
compensate testsuite and documentation for the removal of RTL dump
letters so I would rather do that just once. Does this seem OK?
Yup, thanks for doing this.
The patch include the read/write methods that will be just placeholders
on mainline. Natural
I had sent this to the wrong maillist I think. Yet another error. :-\
In any case .. here it is :
---
Subject:gcc 4.2.3 : make: *** [bootstrap] Error 2
From: "Dennis Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, March 11, 2008
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Oliver Hessling
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there is a minor mistake in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.3/changes.html
>
> at chapter: New Targets and Target Specific Improvements
> sub-section: IA-32/x86-64
>
> "SSSE3" should be replaced by
> "SSE3"
No,
Hi,
there is a minor mistake in
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.3/changes.html
at chapter: New Targets and Target Specific Improvements
sub-section: IA-32/x86-64
"SSSE3" should be replaced by
"SSE3"
cheers
Oliver
--
(o-(:¬)liver ]-[essling
//\+33 (0)6 31 82 83 84
V_/_ http://openwifiphone
Andreas Schwab wrote:
Basile STARYNKEVITCH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I need all this in the gcc/ subdir, since I want cc1 (the same process) to
1. generate a C file
2. compile it to some dynamically loadable stuff (*.so on Linux/Elf,
perhaps *.la with libtool)
3. lt_dlopenext it
Why d
Basile STARYNKEVITCH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I need all this in the gcc/ subdir, since I want cc1 (the same process) to
> 1. generate a C file
> 2. compile it to some dynamically loadable stuff (*.so on Linux/Elf,
> perhaps *.la with libtool)
> 3. lt_dlopenext it
Why do you need to do
Hello All,
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Hello Basile,
* Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote on Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 09:18:54PM CET:
First, I have the impression that the libtool in e.g.
libjava/Makefile.in or libgomp/Makefile.in or libmudflap/Makefile.in is
not the usual one (I mean the Debian/Sid libtool
Hello Basile,
* Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote on Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 09:18:54PM CET:
> First, I have the impression that the libtool in e.g.
> libjava/Makefile.in or libgomp/Makefile.in or libmudflap/Makefile.in is
> not the usual one (I mean the Debian/Sid libtool package version
> 1.5.26-1 f
Hello All
and a big thanks to David Fang
(I, Basile, asked)
What is the right way to produce a dynamically loadable "library"
which would be the most portable?
and David Fang kindly replied to me:
Hi, for starters:
in Makefile.am:
lib_LTLIBRARIES = mymodule.la
mymodule_la_SOURCES = foo.c
m
Hello All,
in my MELT branch http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/MiddleEndLispTranslator I need
to compile a C file into a shared object library which can be loaded by
lt_dlopenext
First, I have the impression that the libtool in e.g.
libjava/Makefile.in or libgomp/Makefile.in or libmudflap/Makefile.in
> I have a developing cross compiler sparc-sun-solaris2.10-gcc on x86.
> There is an available binary translator that could execute SPARC ELF
> on x86 machines. so I want to run testings by runtest. It would
> definitely help a lot if anyone could give clues on how to manage it.
You want a SPARC s
dalibor becky omero ji sonia
bridget dorothy
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 9:41 AM, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> > Now tree scalar evolution goes over PHI nodes and realises that
> > aligned_src_35 has a scalar evolution {aligned_src_22 + 16, +, 16}_1)
> > where aligned_src_22 is
> > (const long int *) src0_12(D) i.e the
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 08:02, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> another possibility would be to represent a = b < c ? d : e as
>
> GIMPLE_ASSIGN (LT_EXPR, a, b, c, d, e)
>
> and a = (b < c) as
>
> GIMPLE_ASSIGN (LT_EXPR, a, b, c, true, false)
Yeah, I think I like this one. We don't
Hi,
> On 03/10/08 08:24, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> >You could either do
> >
> >GIMPLE_ASSIGN
>
> But 'cond' would be an unflattened tree expression. I'm trying to avoid
> that.
>
> >or invent COND_GT_EXPR, COND_GE_EXPR, etc. (at least in GIMPLE
> >we always have a comparison in COND_EXPR_C
On 03/10/08 08:24, Richard Guenther wrote:
You could either do
GIMPLE_ASSIGN
But 'cond' would be an unflattened tree expression. I'm trying to avoid
that.
or invent COND_GT_EXPR, COND_GE_EXPR, etc. (at least in GIMPLE
we always have a comparison in COND_EXPR_COND, never a plain
boolean
Hi,
> Now tree scalar evolution goes over PHI nodes and realises that
> aligned_src_35 has a scalar evolution {aligned_src_22 + 16, +, 16}_1)
> where aligned_src_22 is
> (const long int *) src0_12(D) i.e the original src pointer. Therefore
> to calculate aligned_src_62 before the second loop comp
"Fran Baena" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> By the way, RTL is not really machine-independent. The data
>> structures are machine independent. But the contents are not. You
>> can not, even in principle, take the RTL generated for one processor
>> and compile it on another processor.
>
> I
Hans Kester wrote:
> I searched for this error and found:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-09/msg00421.html
> Wasn't this patched? How do I fix this?
It wasn't actually fixed. That was a very long thread and it's easy to
get confused, particularly since the mailing list archives don't
crossthrea
Hello all,
For a gcc port i need to add new section. This new section has both
the variations i.e initialized and uninitialized say .sbss and .sdata
After going through the internals this is what i understood
1. Only one section attribute is need. Depending on whether the
variable is initialized
Hi,
I am writing about a problem I noticed with the code generated for
memcpy by arm-none-eabi-gcc.
Now, memcpy has three distinct loops - one that copies (4 *sizeof
(long) ) bytes per iteration, one that copies sizeof (long) bytes per
iteration and the last one that copies one byte per iteration
Hi all,
I have a developing cross compiler sparc-sun-solaris2.10-gcc on x86.
There is an available binary translator that could execute SPARC ELF
on x86 machines. so I want to run testings by runtest. It would
definitely help a lot if anyone could give clues on how to manage it.
Thanks in advance
Hi,
> By the way, RTL is not really machine-independent. The data
> structures are machine independent. But the contents are not. You
> can not, even in principle, take the RTL generated for one processor
> and compile it on another processor.
I thought that RTL represented something close
Ping!
When building GCC 4.3.0 for any newlib target I get:
...
supports shared libraries... yes
checking dynamic linker characteristics... no
checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate
checking for shl_load... configure: error: Link tests are not allowed
after GCC_NO_EXECU
I am extremely thankful to GCC Steering Committee for appointing me as
maintainer for CR16 and CRX ports.
I will submit the patch adding myself to the MAINTAINERS file for trunk.
Can I also submit the patch for 4.3 branch?
Please suggest.
Thanks,
Pompa
David Edelsohn wrote:
I am ple
31 matches
Mail list logo
