From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1970 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2007 07:37:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 1950 invoked by uid 48); 2 Jun 2007 07:37:11 -0000 Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 07:37:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070602073711.1949.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/32049] Support on x86_64 also kind=16 In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-06/txt/msg00086.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #6 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-02 07:37 ------- (In reply to comment #2) > http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/libc/sysdeps/ieee754/?cvsroot=glibc > > Look into ldbl-128 directory... I don't think that's built into glibc on x86_64, is it? And, as far as I know, politics prevents us from integrating parts of glibc into gcc (the libgcc-math issue). What do you think is the best route for us? Can we convince the glibc maintainers to build and expose that library? -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot | |org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-06-02 07:37:11 date| | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32049