From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17575 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2008 14:31:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 17564 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Aug 2008 14:31:02 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.33.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:30:23 +0000 Received: from zps37.corp.google.com (zps37.corp.google.com [172.25.146.37]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id m75EU5kl026137; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 15:30:05 +0100 Received: from smtp.corp.google.com (spacemonkey3.corp.google.com [192.168.120.116]) by zps37.corp.google.com with ESMTP id m75EU363001256 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 07:30:04 -0700 Received: from localhost.localdomain.google.com (69-36-227-135.cust.layer42.net [69.36.227.135] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.corp.google.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m75ETvYW006684 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 07:30:00 -0700 To: Michael Haubenwallner Cc: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: how to configure for 64bit default on ia64-hp-hpux11* References: <1215523497.21100.30.camel@sapc154.salomon.at> <1217838647.7598.20.camel@salomon-22> From: Ian Lance Taylor Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:31:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1217838647.7598.20.camel@salomon-22> (Michael Haubenwallner's message of "Mon\, 04 Aug 2008 10\:30\:47 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-08/txt/msg00049.txt.bz2 Michael Haubenwallner writes: > No response after ~1 month - please tell if wrong list (which one > instead?), thanks! I doubt anybody has any good ideas here. An alternative mailing list for this question would be config-patches@gnu.org. It would also be reasonable to bring this question up on the gcc developer's list, gcc@gcc.gnu.org. > On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 15:24 +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: >> Hi, >> >> when building for ia64-hp-hpux11*, the default output type is 32bit. >> >> While this is a multilib-compiler by default, I'd like to >> --disable-multilib, and use different target triplets instead of >> compiler flags, very similar to these ones: >> >> 32bit 64bit >> i?86-pc-linux-gnu x86_64-pc-linux-gnu >> i386-sun-solaris2* x86_64-sun-solaris2* >> sparc-sun-solaris2* sparcv9-sun-solaris2* >> hppa2.0*-hp-hpux11* hppa64-hp-hpux11* >> powerpc-ibm-aix5* powerpc64-ibm-aix5* >> ppc-*-linux-gnu ppc64-*-linux-gnu >> ia64-*-linux-gnu >> >> Now, what could be the 64bit target triplet for ia64-hpux ? >> >> 32bit 64bit >> ia64-hp-hpux11* ia64_64-hp-hpux11* >> >> Or should 'ia64-hp-hpux11*' be changed to default to 64bit, and >> introduce some new 'ia64_32-hp-hpux11*' instead ? >> >> 32bit 64bit >> ia64_32-hp-hpux11* ia64-hp-hpux11* > > > What about these names, inspired by hppa2.0n/hppa2.0w: > ia64-hp-hpux11*: default 32bit, keep as-is > ia64n-hp-hpux11*: default 32bit, eventually new for > completeness > ia64w-hp-hpux11*: default 64bit, new As far as I can tell, ia64*-hp-hpux* is the only target which supports 32-bit ia64 code at all. I have no idea whether the default should change. For that you should probably ask the union of the ia64 and HP/UX maintainers. According to gcc's MAINTAINER files the ia64 maintainer is Jim Wilson and the HP/UX maintainers are Dave Anglin and Steve Ellcey. They are all responsive. My tentative vote would be to flip the default for ia64*-hp-hpux* to be 64-bit to match the other ia64 targets, to give it 32-bit libraries as multilibs, and to add a configure option --with-model={ilp32,lp64} to set the default model. But I don't know very much about either ia64 or HP/UX. Ian