From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <java-patches-return-20305-listarch-java-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 8954 invoked by alias); 20 Jun 2011 15:28:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 8921 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Jun 2011 15:28:09 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:27:55 +0000
Received: (qmail 5528 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2011 15:27:54 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO digraph.polyomino.org.uk) (joseph@127.0.0.2)  by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 20 Jun 2011 15:27:54 -0000
Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost)	by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.72)	(envelope-from <joseph@codesourcery.com>)	id 1QYgOG-0004dl-Bd; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:27:52 +0000
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:28:00 -0000
From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
To: Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@gnu.org>,     Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de>,     Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>, Steve Ellcey <sje@cup.hp.com>,     Richard Earnshaw <richard.earnshaw@arm.com>,     Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com>,     Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>, Douglas Rupp <rupp@gnat.com>,     Tristan Gingold <gingold@adacore.com>, Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net>,     Kaz Kojima <kkojima@gcc.gnu.org>, David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>,     Sterling Augustine <augustine.sterling@gmail.com>,     Arnaud Charlet <charlet@adacore.com>, java-patches@gcc.gnu.org,     Nicola Pero <nicola.pero@meta-innovation.com>, libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org,     Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford@googlemail.com>
Subject: Re: [build] Move unwinder to toplevel libgcc
In-Reply-To: <yddhb7kmsvr.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1106201523080.16125@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
References: <yddfwn4pu5u.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1106201503490.16125@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <yddhb7kmsvr.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Mailing-List: contact java-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <java-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:java-patches-subscribe@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:java-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:java-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>, <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: java-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-q2/txt/msg00082.txt.bz2

On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Rainer Orth wrote:

> Certainly: your wiki entry gives a good overview.  For the moment, I'll
> probably concentrate on the build side of things, though.  I may attack
> gthr* stuff and fp-bit.[ch] next, both of which I can at least partially
> test on my targets.

fp-bit.[ch] has the interesting issue of FLOAT_BIT_ORDER_MISMATCH and 
FLOAT_WORD_ORDER_MISMATCH being defined by makefile rules when it ought to 
be possible to deduce that information from macros predefined by the 
compiler.  (See what I said in 
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg02262.html> about the 
meanings of those macros.)

dfp-bit.* and fixed-bit.* can probably move along with fp-bit.* (or 
before, or after), and I don't think there are any complicated issues 
around those files.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com