On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 10:13 PM Martin Uecker wrote:
> Am Dienstag, dem 25.03.2025 um 19:09 -0700 schrieb Bill Wendling:
> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 3:04 PM Martin Uecker wrote:
> > >
>
> >
> > It seems clear that using "__self" is most likely goin
On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 3:04 PM Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> Am Dienstag, dem 18.03.2025 um 14:03 -0700 schrieb Yeoul Na via Gcc:
> >
> > > On Mar 18, 2025, at 12:48 PM, Martin Uecker wrote:
> > >
> > > Am Dienstag, dem 18.03.2025 um 09:52 -0700 schrieb Yeoul Na via Gcc:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mar 18,
w more about setting up libraries than I do. I have root access,
> but chances are I would just mess up the virtual machine :-)
Easiest is probably to install the advance toolchain. Mike said he'll work on
that later this morning.
Thanks!
Bill
>
> Regards
>
> Thomas
Would starting from Advance Toolchain 15 with the most recent glibc make things
easier for Thomas to test?
Thanks,
Bill
On 10/29/21 4:06 PM, Michael Meissner via Gcc wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 09:07:38PM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> I tried this
I and compiler support, glibc would also need to support IEEE QP for
these other
targets. Currently we only have support for powerpc64le.
===
Is this a fair summary of the results of the discussion?
Thanks again!
Bill
Well, I'm not sure it's quite this easy; when developing ELFv2, there was enough
doubt about the provenance/ownership of ELFv1 that we weren't comfortable
borrowing
language from it. That may have been an excess of caution, or it may not...
That said, with enough diligence I would hope we would be able to create
modifications to the ELFv1 document, but we might incur some paperwork.
Bill
>
>
> Segher
essed in GCC 12. Kewen Lin
is leading that effort. Kewen, do you feel we have any major remaining
concerns with this plan?
Thanks,
Bill
Thanks,
Florian
t such doesn't exist.
It amazes me how many people who don't work for IBM want to assert IBM's
policies.
There is certainly ability to work on projects on your own time that
don't conflict with IBM's business. You simply have to be open about it
and make sure your management is aware.
Bill
On 1/4/21 1:36 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 1/4/21 10:40 AM, Bill Schmidt via Gcc wrote:
Hi! I'm attempting to do something that may not have been done
before, so I'm looking for advice, or a pointer to where, in fact, it
has been done before. :)
I'm automatically generating a
Actually, the "./filename" syntax works fine. I was missing a
dependency in my t-rs6000 to make the header file appear available.
Sorry for the noise!
Bill
On 1/4/21 11:40 AM, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Hi! I'm attempting to do something that may not have been done before,
so
t seem to work for
adding something to gtyp-input.list.
Any recommendations on what I should do next? At the moment it looks
like I might have to hack on gengtype to invent a way to scan a file in
the build directory, but I have a mild amount of hope that someone has
solved this before. Thanks for any help!
Bill
alter).
Sincerely,
Bill Messmer
-Original Message-
From: Mark Wielaard
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 6:39 PM
To: Bill Messmer
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: DWARF Debug Info Relocations (.debug_str STRP
references)
Hi Bill,
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 10:22:34PM +0000,
000 00059e50
0c458644 0 0 1
[66] .rela.debug_info RELA 0c4b2498
1288ae68 0018 I 7865 8
And that relocation is still there via "readelf -r strippe
Have I misunderstood something fundamental here about the relocation data in
.rela.debug_info and its application...? Or is the relocation data in this
.rela.debug_info bad...?
If there is a better mailing list for me to ask such a question, I'd be happy
for a redirect.
Sincerely,
Bill Messmer
On 11/12/20 10:15 AM, Bill Schmidt via Gcc wrote:
On 11/12/20 10:06 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Does the i386 mm_malloc.h file match your scenario?
Ah, that looks promising indeed, and perhaps very simple! Marc,
thanks for the pointer!
And indeed, with this example it was a two-line change
On 11/12/20 10:06 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020, Bill Schmidt via Gcc wrote:
Hi! I'm working on a project where it's desirable to generate a
target-specific header file while building GCC, and install it with
the rest of the target-specific headers (i.e., in
lib/g
Thanks for the pointer! I'll have a look at this.
Much obliged,
Bill
On 11/12/20 9:54 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 at 15:39, Bill Schmidt via Gcc wrote:
Hi! I'm working on a project where it's desirable to generate a
target-specific header
file while bu
mple?
* Otherwise, I'd be interested in advice about providing new infrastructure to
support
this. I'm a relative noob with respect to the configury code, and I'm sure my
initial instincts will be wrong. :)
Thanks for any help!
Bill
On 8/10/20 3:30 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
Hi Matt,
The best thing to do here is file a bug report with the code to reproduce it:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
Thanks
Also, be sure to follow the instructions at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/.
Bill
On Sat, 8 Aug 2020 at 23:01, Soul
On 7/13/20 7:08 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Bill Schmidt via Gcc:
Matthias, if you want to post a patch for GCC 9 and GCC 10, I'm sure
that would be accepted (though I do not have the power to pre-approve
it). Or I can put it on my list for later in the summer when my life
settles down.
CC 10. Is this really what you intended to do?
No, it's not dropped. Some people are being pedantic about the name,
which is why Bill added {,le}. powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu means
everything. If you want to add {,le} back, that's fine. But there
always is some variant omitted, and tha
8 BE and power 8 and 9 LE and
saw nothing untoward.
--
-Bill Seurer
On 2/4/20 5:09 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
On Feb 04 2020, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Hm. If I'm understanding you correctly, this still attempts to create a
new branch:
wschmidt@marlin:~/newgcc/gcc/config/rs6000$ git push --dry-run
users/wschmidt +wschmidt/builtins:users/wschmidt/builtins
On 2/4/20 4:31 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
On Feb 04 2020, Bill Schmidt wrote:
wschmidt@marlin:~/newgcc/gcc/config/rs6000$ git push --dry-run
users/wschmidt +wschmidt/builtins
To git+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
* [new branch] wschmidt/builtins -> wschmidt/builtins
Well, tha
the push spec in my config.
Can someone with strong git-fu give me any suggestions?
Best regards,
Bill
On 11/11/19 7:26 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019, Bill Schmidt wrote:
On 11/7/19 5:48 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 05.11.19 13:45, Richard Biener wrote:
The first release candidate for GCC 7.5 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7.5.0-RC-20191105/
and
r89677.c: New testcase.
This looks rather familiar, actually. I seem to recall an SLP
degradation from a change to tree-ssa-sink.c on trunk this release.
Richi, could there be a missing backport here?
Bill
Matthias
Er, sorry, I guess that is saying the same thing as it is broken in
7.5. Oops.
On 11/7/19 9:24 AM, Bill Schmidt wrote:
That second set of failures occurs already on 7.4.1...
On 11/7/19 5:48 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 05.11.19 13:45, Richard Biener wrote:
The first release candidate for
That second set of failures occurs already on 7.4.1...
On 11/7/19 5:48 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 05.11.19 13:45, Richard Biener wrote:
The first release candidate for GCC 7.5 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7.5.0-RC-20191105/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been
seen.
--
-Bill Seurer
32.180.131) 82.745 ms !X 82.740 ms !X
82.292 ms !X
The !X means "communication administratively prohibited" apparently.
--
-Bill Seurer
ge to just be due to
unsafe math optimizations.
Has anyone else seen these failures?
Have you tried -fno-strict-aliasing? There is a known issue with
spec_qsort() that affects both of these benchmarks. See
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83201.
Hope this helps,
Bill
wer 8 and power 9 and all looks well.
--
-Bill Seurer
On 5/22/19 9:58 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 5/22/19 6:27 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> On 22/05/2019 13:17, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>>> On 5/22/19 5:19 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>>>> On 21/05/2019 21:18, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>>>>> On 5/2
On 5/22/19 5:19 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 21/05/2019 21:18, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> On 5/21/19 11:47 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>> The GCC coding style says to use "floating-point" as an adjective
>>> rather than "floating point." A
terchangeably. With just one exception, the C++ standard uses
> the hyphenated form.
The hyphenated form is correct English, so I certainly prefer it. :-)
Bill
>
> Thanks
> Martin
>
8 BE and power 8 and power 9 LE.
--
-Bill Seurer
well.
--
-Bill Seurer
wer 9 LE all went well.
--
-Bill Seurer
use GCC 8 or later, and runs
into this problem, they can use -mno-builtin-mem{set,cmp} as a workaround.
Do you feel that's satisfactory?
We can also have a private discussion if you feel that's warranted.
Thanks,
Bill
>
> Thanks,
> Florian
>
-unknown-linux-gnu. Please test it and report any issues to
bugzilla.
If all goes well I'd like to release GCC 7.4 at the end of next week.
I bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu and
powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu and all went well.
--
-Bill Seurer
aw no unexpected issues.
--
-Bill Seurer
-unknown-linux-gnu. Please test it and report any issues to
bugzilla.
If all goes well I'd like to release 8.2 on Thursday, July 26th.
I bootstrapped and tested this on power 7 and power 8 big endian and
power 8 and power 9 little endian and saw no problems.
--
-Bill Seurer
x86_64-linux and i686-linux. Please test it and report any issues to
bugzilla.
If all goes well, I'd like to release 8.1 on Wednesday, May 2nd.
I bootstrapped and tested it on powerpc64 BE and LE on power8 and power9
(LE) and power 8 and power 7 (BE) and saw no problems.
--
-Bill Seurer
wer 8 and power 7) and it looks good.
--
-Bill Seurer
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Please test it and report any issues to
bugzilla.
If all goes well I'd like to release 7.3 on Wednesday, January 24th.
Everything looks good with this for powerpc64.
--
-Bill Seurer
hat as well?
Thanks,
Martin
I just did a build/test of current trunk (all languages, r251389) on a
powerpc64le RHEL 7.3 system that has the same version of msgfmt and it
went fine.
--
-Bill Seurer
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Please test it and report any issues to
bugzilla.
If all goes well I'd like to release 6.4 on Tuesday, July 4th.
I bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64 BE and LE
(powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu and powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu) and
there were no problems.
--
stand that we have been
looking at these kinds of performance issues for several years. This does
not mean that there are no cases where the pipelined lvx solution works better
for a particular loop, but if you let the compiler optimize it (or do similar
optimization in your own assembly code), lxvd2x is almost always better.
Thanks,
Bill
> On Jan 23, 2017, at 8:47 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 08:45:16AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>>> 2017-01-23 Jakub Jelinek
>>>
>>> * configure.tgt: Enable tsan and lsan on powerpc64{,le}-*-linux*.
>>>
>>>
> On Jan 23, 2017, at 8:32 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 08:22:30AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> TSan support was contributed to LLVM by a student working at one of the US
>> National Labs a while back. I helped him with some of the PPC assembly
&
> On Jan 23, 2017, at 8:32 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 08:22:30AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> TSan support was contributed to LLVM by a student working at one of the US
>> National Labs a while back. I helped him with some of the PPC assembly
&
late in the
release? I can run a quick test with TSan turned on to see where we're at.
-- Bill
Bill Schmidt, Ph.D.
GCC for Linux on Power
Linux on Power Toolchain
IBM Linux Technology Center
wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
> On Jan 23, 2017, at 6:53 AM, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
>
> H
On 10/04/16 10:38, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Bill Seurer wrote:
parameter_handler.cc: In member function 'double
ParameterHandler::get_double(const string&) const':
parameter_handler.cc:777:28: error: ISO C++ forbids comparison between
point
not supposed to change the
spec test cases. Any ideas on how to work around this?
--
-Bill Seurer
t; slsr_process_phi () in gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c:
>>
>> if (SSA_NAME_IS_DEFAULT_DEF (arg))
>> arg_bb = single_succ (ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR_FOR_FN (cfun));
>> else
>> gimple_bb (SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT (arg));
>>
>> Presumably it should be:
>>
t this from happening in the
future.
--
-Bill Seurer
On Tue, 2016-04-12 at 10:00 +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 01:41:05PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > On 04/08/2016 11:10 AM, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> > > The first is an issue with TOC-relative addresses on PowerPC. These are
> > > symbolic addr
On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 13:41 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 04/08/2016 11:10 AM, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> > The first is an issue with TOC-relative addresses on PowerPC. These are
> > symbolic addresses that are to be loaded from a fixed slot in the table
> > of contents
) Are the alias sets bogus, or am I misinterpreting this? If they are
wrong, please point me to where they are computed and I can debug
further.
Thanks for any help! I haven't dug deeply into the aliasing analysis
before.
Bill
On 04/01/16 10:48, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Bill Seurer wrote:
Is there some way using deja-gnu to have a single test case run multiple
times using different sets of compiler options? I didn't see anything in
the documentation and didn't see any examp
at to look
for).
For example, something like this if I wanted to compile the test case
once with -Dfoo and once with -Dbar.
/* { dg-options "-Dfoo" } */
/* { dg-options "-Dbar" } */
That actually just uses the second set of options as-is.
Thanks!
--
-Bill Seurer
ent/dl/576
Thanks,
Bill
BE and LE. This is discussed more in Chapter 6 of the
ELFv2 ABI manual, which can be obtained from the OpenPOWER Connect
website (free registration required):
https://www-03.ibm.com/technologyconnect/tgcm/TGCMServlet.wss?alias=OpenPOWER&linkid=1n0000
Bill
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 17:11 +
larger must use vec_vsx_ld to avoid errors.
Again, sorry for my previous omission!
Thanks,
Bill Schmidt, Ph.D.
IBM Linux Technology Center
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 15:42 +, Ewart Timothée wrote:
> thank you very much for this answer.
> I know my memory is aligned so I will use vec_ld/s
gned load/store performance on earlier processors
was less efficient, so the tradeoffs differ.
I hope this is helpful!
Bill Schmidt, Ph.D.
IBM Linux Technology Center
You wrote:
> I have a issue/question using VMX/VSX on Power8 processor on a little endian
> system.
> Using intrinsics function, i
m baseline symbols file should be generated. Can someone please
enlighten me about the process?
Thanks,
Bill
least significant bits of any register are the rightmost bits,
and big-endian numbering begins at the left. (I don't really like the
commentary, since "least significant bits" isn't a very good term to use
with vectors.) Analogously, a 64-bit integer is numbered with 0 on the
xtract is defined in the back-end, how does one figure out if the
> BIT_FIELD_REF is a product of the gimplifier's indirect ref folding or the
> vectorizer's bit-field extraction and apply the appropriate correction in
> vec_extract's expansion? Or am I missing something that corrects
> BIT_FIELD_REFs
> between the gimplifier and the RTL expander?
There is no inconsistency here.
Hope this helps!
Bill
>
> Thanks,
> Tejas.
>
Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Bill Schmidt
> wrote:
> > Six years ago, Michael Matz proposed a patch for generating profile
> > instrumentation in a thread-safe manner:
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00950.html
> >
> > Reading th
hread-safe profiling patch wasn't
implemented will give us more of a clue.
Thanks for any help!
Bill
On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 11:18 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 15:51 +0100, Sofiane Naci wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Consider the following sequence, which computes 2 addresses to access an
> > array:
> >
> > _2 = (long unsigned int) i_1(D);
&g
XPR ;
> _6 = A2_5(D) + _4;
> ...
> _9 = WIDEN_MULT_PLUS_EXPR ;
> _10 = A2_5(D) + _9;
>
>
> With this particular example, this causes a Dhrystone regression at the
> AArch64 back end.
>
> Where in the front end could such an optimization take place?
>
>
quals 3145728 decimal).
While a sizeof(unsigned short) returns 2 bytes, in this case the pointer
into the unioned buffer is moved 4 bytes.
This bug makes it hell to you any of your products to build emulators
for the 16-bit processors.
Is there a definition for a 16-bit quantity that will work in a union?
Thanks!
Bill Beech
NJ7P
ect I'm not
the only one in that situation.
The fact that there has been little response to the ARM Summit doesn't
mean that nobody cares or that the problems seem to large to solve.
It just means that we're going to have to find a different way to get
this work done.
b.g.
--
Bill Gatliff
b...@billgatliff.com
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Axel Freyn wrote:
> Hi,
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 01:43:51PM +0100, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 06:07:48AM -0500, Bill Cox wrote:
>> > Unfortunately, while I could implement this idea in a few days, the
>>
ot.
Anyway, just my dumb idea for the day... If through some miracle this
particular dumb idea appeals to the GCC Gods, I volunteer to write it.
Bill
On Dec 16, 2009, at 1:26 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 12/16/2009 03:21 AM, John Regehr wrote:
>> Hopefully the results are more fair and useful now. Again, feedback is
>> appreciated.
>
> I would also avoid testcases using volatile. Smaller code on these
> testcases is often a sign of miscomp
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Kirill Kononenko
wrote:
> Hello
>
>
> So how did it happen that the only project which was a candidate for
> libJIT Summer of Code in GNU, with the same title got selected in
> LLVM?
>
>
> Does it mean that the same genius idea came to two minds?
>
No. It's a consp
large but sparsely-used header
files. I will try a few experiments here. I'm not terribly
comfortable with aggressively cleaning the tree in free_lang_specifics
until we've clarified a GIMPLE type system and a plan for adjusting
early-generated debug info to reflect middle-end optimization.
--Bill
> I'm inclined to remove it if it's not doing anything.
It was needed when the LTO reader had to map DWARF2 sections.
It is obsolete now.
--Bill
Would there be any interest in a SCO
binary of the latest gcc compiler? Could the 2.95 compiler make a 4.2
compiler? I am not a programmer but would be willing to give it a shot.
Regards...
Bill
--
William C. House, CPA
House & Albright, P.C.
Huntsville, Alabama
1-256-539-8002
1-256-536-7236 fax
On Jun 15, 2007, at 3:45 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Bill Wendling wrote:
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but the above seems to indicate to me that the
structure (and, therefore, all of its fields) are hidden, one of its
functions is from an external and visible source.
Yes. And, therefore, emitt
On Jun 15, 2007, at 12:48 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Consider:
struct __attribute__((vsibility ("hidden"))) S {
void __declspec(dllimport) f();
};
At present, we give "f" hidden visibility. That seems odd since the
user has explicitly told us that the symbol is coming from another
shared l
I'm sure there are some at your school's website. Or you can ask you
TA for help with your homework.
-bw
On May 15, 2007, at 11:33 AM, craig clow wrote:
Hello,
Does anyone know of a good web site for sample C code supported by
GCC 3.3.2?
Specifically, I am looking for code that can read f
On May 12, 2007, at 6:32 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On 5/11/07, Bill Wendling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This one was just filed against 4.2.0:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31903
It is causing LLVM (at least) to fail to build. Do you think it's
worth adding
On May 11, 2007, at 5:15 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Bill Wendling wrote:
This one was just filed against 4.2.0:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31903
It is causing LLVM (at least) to fail to build. Do you think it's
worth
adding to the list?
Does it show up anywhere
On May 11, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Every time I think we're almost there with this release, I seem to
manage to get stuck. :-( However, we're very close: the only PRs that
I'm waiting for are:
PR 30252: Wrong code generation, perhaps due to the C++ front end's
representation for
On Apr 8, 2007, at 11:35 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
I believe I got the TOT -- .svn/entries says "svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/
gcc/trunk". Is this a known problem?
It's the first I've heard of it, please file a PR. I'm slightly
amazed this
hasn't been causing bootstrap breakage already, it looks real
On Apr 8, 2007, at 6:50 PM, Bill Wendling wrote:
Hi all,
This program:
#include
struct tree_type {
unsigned int precision : 9;
};
void *bork(const void *Ty, unsigned Subpart) {
printf("Subpart == %08x\n", Subpart);
return 0;
}
const void *TConvertType(tree_type* type) {
Hi all,
This program:
#include
struct tree_type {
unsigned int precision : 9;
};
void *bork(const void *Ty, unsigned Subpart) {
printf("Subpart == %08x\n", Subpart);
return 0;
}
const void *TConvertType(tree_type* type) {
asm("movl $1104150528, (%%esp)" : : );
const void *Ty = 0;
On Nov 10, 2006, at 9:08 PM, Geert Bosch wrote:
Most people aren't waiting for compilation of single files.
If they do, it is because a single compilation unit requires
parsing/compilation of too many unchanging files, in which case
the primary concern is avoiding redoing useless compilation.
T
Gerald:
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Wed, 24 May 2006, Bill Gatliff wrote:
Indeed, "bitrotted" is in fact a better description of what is happening.
I have tweaked the ChangeLog entry to say "gone", which is even more
neutral, and will do the same on the 4.1 bra
igure script is the
basic cause of the problem, because it assumes the system libraries
are fat when they are not. I can't see how it hurts to test for fat
libraries instead of assuming their presence.
Bill
cause
libSystem.B.dylib is a stub library.
Any suggestions? Does the -isysroot compiler flag fix this sort of
issue? It does not seem to be used in the gcc build.
Bill
an Intel Mac.
This has also been reported by someone trying to use the SDKs to
build a cross compiler on Linux which targeted i386 Darwin, I am
afraid I have lost the reference.
Cheers
Bill Northcott
onal address must have been there.
Bill
I haven't found anything in the docs that I see that explains the
libiberty library. Can this be compiled without having to compile a whole
new compiler? I am running 3.4.6 and what to cross compile for a pdp-11. I
just want to compile the extra support and that's all.
Bill
etely agree.
I recommend that we dispense with the FAQ altogether and put what we
know into the gcc wiki. The closer we work with the gcc team, the more
likely it is that they will continue to support us.
b.g.
--
Bill Gatliff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1 off the top of my head) it became clear that it had fallen into
disrepair, and Bill Gatliff, who was then and is now an active and valuable
contributing member of the crossgcc community, volunteered to take it over.
He then actively maintained it for several years and it was only when his
websit
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
