From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24161 invoked by alias); 25 May 2006 08:03:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 24151 invoked by uid 22791); 25 May 2006 08:03:41 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from omta04sl.mx.bigpond.com (HELO omta04sl.mx.bigpond.com) (144.140.93.156) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 May 2006 08:03:05 +0000 Received: from grove.modra.org ([144.136.172.108]) by omta04sl.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20060525080300.QRDH27710.omta04sl.mx.bigpond.com@grove.modra.org>; Thu, 25 May 2006 08:03:00 +0000 Received: by bubble.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 4AE771CC858; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:33:00 +0930 (CST) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 14:56:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: "H. J. Lu" Cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com, joern.rennecke@superh.com, aoliva@redhat.com, kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp Subject: Re: Should sh-*-* enable 64bit targets? Message-ID: <20060525080300.GG25824@bubble.grove.modra.org> Mail-Followup-To: "H. J. Lu" , binutils@sources.redhat.com, joern.rennecke@superh.com, aoliva@redhat.com, kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp References: <20060524172325.GA4375@lucon.org> <20060524235309.GB25824@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20060525005822.GA7197@lucon.org> <20060525011825.GD25824@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20060525023303.GA8100@lucon.org> <20060525031757.GE25824@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20060525055855.GA9396@lucon.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060525055855.GA9396@lucon.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00458.txt.bz2 On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 10:58:55PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > I built the sh-linux cross binutils without my patch: > > [hjl@gnu-13 binutils-import-cross]$ ./build-sh-linux/ld/ld-new -V > GNU ld version 2.17.50 20060524 > Supported emulations: > shlelf_linux > shelf_linux > > My patch doesn't change it. Ridiculous. You didn't even build a sh-linux cross on a host that tests your change! src/binutils-current/configure --prefix=/usr/local --disable-nls --build=i586-linux --host=i586-linux --target=sh-linux . . ../opcodes/.libs/libopcodes.a(sh64-dis.o): In function `sh64_get_contents_type_disasm': /src/binutils-current/opcodes/sh64-dis.c:463: undefined reference to `sh64_get_contents_type' /src/binutils-current/opcodes/sh64-dis.c:477: undefined reference to `sh64_get_contents_type' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[4]: *** [objdump] Error 1 make[4]: Leaving directory `/home/alan/build/gas/sh/binutils' > The question is what the original intention was. I don't care what the original intent of those SH #ifdef BFD64 tests were. They are quite useless. > I don't think "#ifdef BFD64" is just a comment. targmatch.sed will put > them into targmatch.h: For the purpose of running config.bfd as a shell script, it is most definitely just a comment. targmatch.sed only picks out targ_defvec, so in the case of the SH #ifdef BFD64, it is useless for targmatch.h too. -- Alan Modra IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre