From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26659 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2007 22:30:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 26644 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Nov 2007 22:30:29 -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 22:30:19 +0000 Received: (qmail 7309 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2007 22:30:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.2?) (mitchell@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 27 Nov 2007 22:30:17 -0000 Message-ID: <474C9A65.2060902@codesourcery.com> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:17:00 -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> <474C96C1.7010208@codesourcery.com> <474C98AA.50105@t-online.de> In-Reply-To: <474C98AA.50105@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/msg01518.txt.bz2 Bernd Schmidt wrote: >>> 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? > > That's not something I can answer, being unfamiliar with both targets. > Maybe they don't build/need a default multilib for "no particular target"? I'm pretty certain that both do have a default multilib for a lowest common denominator CPU, and that you have to provide explicit options to link with it. > We have two uses for the bfin-elf compiler - building standalone > applications, and bootstrapping uClibc for > bfin-uclinux/bfin-linux-uclibc. Most targets just do the usual dance of building compilers and libraries interleaved appropriately. For example, we build ARM uClinux compilers without ever building an ARM ELF compiler. Why can't you do that for Blackfin? > For the latter, we need -mfdpic and > -mid-shared-library multilibs, to at least get a libgcc. This always > worked since what is now "-msim" was default behaviour, but it started > to fail the libstdc++ configury once Jie changed that to use > target-specific linker scripts. I really think that we ought to compare with what happens with MIPS or Power and figure out what's different. Are you by any chance configuring a native compiler, rather than a cross? Thanks, -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery mark@codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x713