On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 12:55:15AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Personally, I don't see anything broken with that. The world we are
> in today is very different from a decade ago. More than a decade ago,
> a multilib build by default -probably- made sense; I don't see that today.
But having
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:13 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 12:55:15AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> Personally, I don't see anything broken with that. The world we are
>> in today is very different from a decade ago. More than a decade ago,
>> a multilib build by default
On 07/08/2013 06:17 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> On 7 July 2013 21:33, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>> How about not enabling multi lib build by default on targets we now that
>>> will fail anyway? I have the suspicion this problem is unique
On 07/08/2013 07:33 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> I strongly disagree. We (GCC) are at fault here. We implicitly
> enable a feature at configure time without knowing its builds
> will succeed (despite having repeated reports that it does often
> fail) without much input from the builder (who migh
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 3:43 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 07/08/2013 07:33 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> I strongly disagree. We (GCC) are at fault here. We implicitly
>> enable a feature at configure time without knowing its builds
>> will succeed (despite having repeated reports that it does o
On 8 July 2013 01:29, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Jul 2013 21:57:05 +0200
> Oleg Endo wrote:
>
>
>> - // Randomize the colour, just for asthetics =)
>> + // Randomize the colour, just for aesthetics =)
>>
>> -> missed 'color' (in a couple of places actually)
>
> Because that's the correct way
Hi, GCC Steering Committee, reviewers, and developers,
On behalf of Andes Technology Corp., we are submitting a new port 'nds32'
for GCC contribution. In this contribution, we use the design and strategy
as modern as possible, such as having LRA enabled and taking soft-fp as
our software floating
Hi, all.
First off, I know that I'm posting to GCC list :-)
And I'm looking for competent opinions.
I'm working on CLang/LLVM issue [1].
Clang doesn't put section with relocation entries against section
with templated function instantiation in the same COMDAT group.
AFAIK GCC does not do it too,
On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 07:54:34PM +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> Ondrej Bilka schrieb:
>
> >http://kam.mff.cuni.cz/~ondra/gcc_misspell.patch
>
> This is wrong:
>
> @@ -10834,7 +10834,7 @@ avr_convert_to_type (tree type, tree expr)
> XOP[2] # Bytes to copy
>
> Return TRUE if the exp
On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 09:57:05PM +0200, Oleg Endo wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-07-07 at 19:54 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> > Ondrej Bilka schrieb:
> >
> > > http://kam.mff.cuni.cz/~ondra/gcc_misspell.patch
> >
I fixed most comments, put it here so you can diff these two files.
http://kam.mff.cuni.c
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:29:17AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 8 July 2013 01:29, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Sun, 07 Jul 2013 21:57:05 +0200
> > Oleg Endo wrote:
> >
> >
> >> - // Randomize the colour, just for asthetics =)
> >> + // Randomize the colour, just for aesthetics =)
> >>
> >> ->
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 4:35 AM, Игорь Пашев wrote:
> Hi, all.
>
> First off, I know that I'm posting to GCC list :-)
> And I'm looking for competent opinions.
>
> I'm working on CLang/LLVM issue [1].
> Clang doesn't put section with relocation entries against section
> with templated function inst
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> I think disable multilib by default is a mistake and is a broken
> choice for broken distros which don't install the 32bit development by
> default when you install the development part.
If a distro does something that you consider wron
2013/7/8 Andrew Pinski :
> I think GCC's behavior is depend on the assembler which is being used.
> So if you used Sun's assembler it would have placed it in the same
> COMDAT group. Meaning this is really a GNU binutils issue rather than
> a GCC one.
Thank you.
I believe GCC on Solaris is usin
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 08:11:03AM -0700, Bruce Korb wrote:
> > But having multilib enabled by default on x86_64 is simply very highly
> > desirable,
>
> REMEMBER: we are talking about having a multilib enableable test in
> the configure. If it fails, then it is not enabled by default. This is n
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Far easier would be if not inhibit_libc to try to compile some trivial
> program using say stdlib.h include in libgcc configure and error out there,
> if it isn't for the primary multilib hint that either development support
> for the non-prim
On Jul 8, 2013 4:39 PM, "Bruce Korb" wrote:
>
> Any solution other than an explanation-less "fatal error:
> gnu/stubs-32.h: No such file"
> is fine. There is no way to translate that message into
> "Either --disable-multilib or else install glibc 32 bit development"
> without coming up with the ri
On 07/08/13 10:27, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
I added http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ#gnu_stubs-32.h to improve things
slightly.
Ever so, but thank you. Ultimately, searching for just "stubs-32.h"
will take you there and not require you to wade through too much chaff.
You're still Googling instead of
On Mon, 2013-07-08 at 16:12 +0200, Ondřej Bílka wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 09:57:05PM +0200, Oleg Endo wrote:
> > On Sun, 2013-07-07 at 19:54 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> > > Ondrej Bilka schrieb:
> > >
> > > > http://kam.mff.cuni.cz/~ondra/gcc_misspell.patch
> > >
> I fixed most comment
On Mon, 8 Jul 2013, Ondrej Bilka wrote:
> Hi now, when I have infrastructure ready I made another patch (its 500kb so
> link not to overload list). It is here;
> http://kam.mff.cuni.cz/~ondra/gcc_misspell_conventions.patch
>
> It uses dictionary made by reading gcc conventions.
> http://gcc.gnu.
20 matches
Mail list logo
