On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:02:32AM -0700, Matt Thomas wrote: > > On Oct 9, 2013, at 1:23 AM, Martin Husemann <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:21:16PM -0400, Dennis Ferguson wrote: > >> While looking for something to compile a tree with some m68k bits > >> added I found that a successful build of evbcf needs the changes > >> below. The problems seem related to the binutils changes. > > > > Can you please provide a bit more details? I'm a bit puzzled how > > -fommit-frame-pointer would interfere with new binutils (and if it > > does, isn't that a gcc bug we should fix instead)? > > This is a gcc bug. I'm assuming that __asm & unwind-tables don't mix.
No, the problem is that doesn't want to create unwind tables without having a frame pointer at hand. It is a GCC bug, but more a case of incomplete code generation... Joerg
