This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Michael N. Moran wrote: > Dan Kegel wrote: > > Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > what that tells me is that the perfectly valid SH3 options -mb > > > and -m3 are unrecognized, which further suggests that the wrong > > > compiler is being used since it doesn't recognize SH3-specific > > > options. > > > > > > Maybe the problem is that the kernel makefile is applying target > > cflags when it shouldn't, for some reason. > > This is exactly what I recently found when compiling a 2.6.x kernel > using GCC 4.0.1 for *ARM*. I had to change the arc/arm/Makefile to > get rid of the obsolete flags. a aide note: if i'm building for SH3EB, i would think that i really have to add "-mb -m3" to TARGET_CFLAGS, for obvious reasons. however, as a test last night (for reasons i can't explain), when it became obvious that arch/sh/Makefile was cramming "-mb -m3" onto the compile options, i removed those from TARGET_CFLAGS (something that i would have thought would be a bad idea) and yet i still got what looked like a good build. go figure. at least, that's what it *looked* like, but that's definitely not behaviour i would want to count on under any circumstances. so the options went back and they're staying there. rday ------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |