------- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-02-28 22:38 ------- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] libgcc2.h Improperly determines required built-in function size requirements.
> - Additional Comments From ericw at evcohs dot com 2005-02-28 22:10 > We've already gone over this. If you want to modify the sources to > not declare the long long type for the AVR, fine, but that is on your > experimental sources. I agree that this should be closed, as it was originally specific to the avr; but please try to understand the difference between demonstrating a general problem using an existing port as a baseline, and the stating the port used to demonstrate the general problem has a bug, which is not what was being claimed. (As I do plan to use the avr port as a general small target baseline in likely future general bug reports in this way, as it's the most reliable way to demonstrate the effect of a single parameter in an otherwise known good port.) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18887
