Hi, On Mon, 29 May 2017, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > However, it should probably not be merged to fixes, because it may be a > > breaking change for older Sparc/Linux versions (see my previous e-mail; > > note that the situation with MIPS was probably different, because the > > support of that CPU is much newer). > > I am pretty sure that the "-32" option hasn't changed for aeons, so > there is nothing to break here. And, as I mentioned before, you are > already passing "-b elf32-sparc -m elf32_sparc" to ld, so adding "-32" > to the assembler would not hurt at all. From what I can see, binutils 2.9.1, released 1/5/1998 (19+ years ago) already has it for SPARC (according to the man page). :) But binutils 2.8.1 from 20 years ago, still didn't. So it was added between those versions. :) I cannot confirm this now, but I'm willing to make a bet that our generated assembly syntax already depends on newer binutils, for things like named sections. Although I'm not sure these are enabled for SPARC in their full glory. Charlie _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
