On 07/10/2010 10:01 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jul 2010, Steven Bosscher wrote:
Well, let me add one short comment then. I'd say hppa2-hpux is still
much more relevant than ia64-hpux -- at least, everywhere I'm looking
i.e. workstations. It may be different in the server market.
Anywa
On Sat, 10 Jul 2010, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Well, let me add one short comment then. I'd say hppa2-hpux is still
> much more relevant than ia64-hpux -- at least, everywhere I'm looking
> i.e. workstations. It may be different in the server market.
>
> Anyway, when I look at posted gcc-testresult
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 9:36 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> From http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-09/msg00501.html:
>>> It was also suggested to change hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
>>> to ia64-hpux and to change s390-linux-gnu to s390x-linux-gnu in the
>>> list of s
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> From http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-09/msg00501.html:
>> It was also suggested to change hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
>> to ia64-hpux and to change s390-linux-gnu to s390x-linux-gnu in the
>> list of secondary targets.
> Shall we proceed?
I'd say "Yes", and I di
