Mans Rullgard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: Patrik Kullman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Patrik Kullman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: > > Yes I'm compiling on the ARM. > > I understand that it doesn't check if it's executable if I'm > cross-compiling, and that's what I'm saying. But if I'm not > cross-compiling, and configure uses check_exec instead of check_cc, > the configure-script will detect the lack of ARMv6 and disable it. You're missing my point: that would have no effect at all when cross-compiling. Cross-compiling is supported, and thus the change is pointless. > My expectation is only: If I compile the software without any > options, I expect it to run on the machine it was compiled on - this > patch makes it so (in my scenario). Our expectation is different: the specified compiler is suitable for the intended target. If your target is not the compiler default, use the --cpu flag to override it. I'm not going to change this. In addition to the above, you have another reason to use proper compiler flags for your CPU. Since your compiler apparently is set up with ARMv6 (or later) as default target, it is free to generate ARMv6 instructions from any C code, and quite possibly will do so. If this happens, the executable will still crash at runtime on an ARMv5 CPU. > It's not that strange that the compiler accepts other instructions > than those running on target, since one might want to cross-compile. Indeed, and this is why you are expected to tell the compiler and configure script what your target is. ______________________________________________________ FFmpeg issue tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <https://roundup.mplayerhq.hu/roundup/ffmpeg/issue580> ______________________________________________________
