GCC personalisation /How to add self made option due to cc1obj: error: unrecognized command line option

Hi there, i'm looking for add a new personnal command line option "-mmin_def_version=" on a GCC 4.3.2 ... but i'm still not quite on the result. However i despondently tried to modify many files like opts.c, c-opts.c, gcc.c ... and so on, but i still without any kind of great flavour or effect on

Re: gnat 4.9.2 on arm with rtems

Hi I am on travel this week but I thought we had this problem solved. I poked on a build server I used but can't find the change and it doesn't look to be committed. The issue was that the contents of read_attr_t has changed and the Ada definition of the same structure needs to be updated. This

Re: abort might not flush all open streams before process termination (was: aarch64-suse-linux-gnu: libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/abort-1.c, libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/abort-3.c FAILs)

Hi! On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 12:13:41 +0200, I wrote: > Copying glibc for your information/in case anyone has any further > comments, and the man-pages maintainer, Michael Kerrisk. The issue is > that abort might not flush all open streams before process termination; > original thread starting at >

Re: how to tweak x86 code generation to instrument certain opcodes with CC trap?

So I tried Dyninst but it is not as clean as I need. I am afraid I will need to implement this in the compiler. I have already implemented it as a backend pass for another compiler, but unfortunately it doesnt compile the linux kernel :P So back to square one. Any tips on what code/config-files I

Re: gnat 4.9.2 on arm with rtems

Am Monday 26 October 2015, 08:26:57 schrieb Joel Sherrill: > Hi > > I am on travel this week but I thought we had this problem > solved. I poked on a build server I used but can't find > the change and it doesn't look to be committed. > Yes, it was me back then too ;-) I have been occupied the l

Re: gnat 4.9.2 on arm with rtems

On 10/26/2015 3:02 PM, Jan Sommer wrote: Am Monday 26 October 2015, 08:26:57 schrieb Joel Sherrill: Hi I am on travel this week but I thought we had this problem solved. I poked on a build server I used but can't find the change and it doesn't look to be committed. Yes, it was me back then

Re: TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES question

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015, Jeff Law wrote: > > Now I know that we can't get rid of these truncation/extensions > > entirely, but do we need both? It seems like foo could say that > > if the original registers (198 and 200) are argument registers > > that were extended to SImode due to TARGET_PROMOTE_PR

Re: gnat 4.9.2 on arm with rtems

Am Monday 26 October 2015, 15:09:34 schrieb Joel Sherrill: > > On 10/26/2015 3:02 PM, Jan Sommer wrote: > > Am Monday 26 October 2015, 08:26:57 schrieb Joel Sherrill: > >> Hi > >> > >> I am on travel this week but I thought we had this problem > >> solved. I poked on a build server I used but can'

Re: gnat 4.9.2 on arm with rtems

On October 26, 2015 5:02:07 PM EDT, Jan Sommer wrote: >Am Monday 26 October 2015, 15:09:34 schrieb Joel Sherrill: >> >> On 10/26/2015 3:02 PM, Jan Sommer wrote: >> > Am Monday 26 October 2015, 08:26:57 schrieb Joel Sherrill: >> >> Hi >> >> >> >> I am on travel this week but I thought we had th