From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15218 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2007 22:14:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 15065 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Nov 2007 22:14:51 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:14:47 +0000 Received: (qmail 5302 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2007 22:14:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.2?) (mitchell@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 27 Nov 2007 22:14:45 -0000 Message-ID: <474C96C1.7010208@codesourcery.com> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:43:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bernd Schmidt CC: Jie Zhang , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, GCC Patches Subject: Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES References: <46EFBCC1.6070200@gmail.com> <46EFC383.7020503@t-online.de> <46EFC9E9.7090201@gmail.com> <46EFCEF9.3060304@t-online.de> <46EFCF7A.2080704@gmail.com> <46EFD236.6080907@t-online.de> <46EFDA4D.3070006@gmail.com> <474C0C52.8050503@t-online.de> <474C8FA4.2040603@codesourcery.com> <474C95BA.1060807@t-online.de> In-Reply-To: <474C95BA.1060807@t-online.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg01512.txt.bz2 Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> If -mfdpic doesn't make sense for Blackfin, shouldn't it just be an >> error? Why accept it, but make it imply the simulator? > > Because all the target libraries fail to build if the configure tests > don't link. But why isn't that a problem with the target libraries or the way in which GCC is being configured? Why don't we have that problem for MIPS or Power, given that they don't link with a target board by default either? I'm not trying to be rhetorical. I just want to understand what's going on here because it sounded to me from your patch like we were making the compiler accept options that don't make sense in order to work around some problem -- and maybe that problem is what should really be solved. Thanks, -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery mark@codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x713