From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id F1B753858D39; Wed,  2 Mar 2022 00:37:33 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org F1B753858D39
From: "bergner at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/104208] -mlong-double-64 should override a previous
 -mabi=ibmlongdouble
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:37:33 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-104208-4-hArUGmlcZF@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-104208-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-104208-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:37:34 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D104208

--- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner <bergner at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> And in a compiler that defaults to -mlong-double128,
> -mabi=3Dieeelongdouble
> or
> -mabi=3Dibmlongdouble
> would be ok, but
> -mlong-double-64 -mabi=3Dibmlongdouble
> would not.

But isn't this last case exactly the scenario that Florian mentions they ha=
ve
in the glibc build issue?  Meaning they have a gcc that defaults to
-mlong-double-128 and they're building individual files using -mlong-double=
-64
-mabi=3Dibmlongdouble which you state should not be ok, but as it stands no=
w,
it's already not ok and that is what is causing the build to error out.  Or=
 am
I misunderstanding you?=