http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54179
--- Comment #28 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-08-06 08:42:57 UTC --- (In reply to comment #26) > Well, when I read on the documentation page > > http://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html > > > --enable-build-with-cxx > Build GCC using a C++ compiler rather than a C compiler. This is an > experimental option which may become the default in a later release. > > > --enable-bootstrap > In special cases, you may want to perform a 3-stage build even if the > target and host triplets are different. This is possible when the host can run > code compiled for the target (e.g. host is i686-linux, target is i486-linux). > Starting from GCC 4.2, to do this you have to configure explicitly with > --enable-bootstrap. > > > --enable-checking > --enable-checking=list > When you specify this option, the compiler is built to perform internal > consistency checks of the requested complexity. This does not change the > generated code, but adds error checking within the compiler. This will slow > down the compiler and may only work properly if you are building the compiler > with GCC. This is `yes' by default when building from SVN or snapshots, but > `release' for releases. The default for building the stage1 compiler is `yes'. > More control over the checks may be had by specifying list. The categories of > checks available are `yes' (most common checks > `assert,misc,tree,gc,rtlflag,runtime'), `no' (no checks at all), `all' (all > but > `valgrind'), `release' (cheapest checks `assert,runtime') or `none' (same as > `no'). Individual checks can be enabled with these flags `assert', `df', > `fold', `gc', `gcac' `misc', `rtl', `rtlflag', `runtime', `tree', and > `valgrind'. > > The `valgrind' check requires the external valgrind simulator, available > from http://valgrind.org/. The `df', `rtl', `gcac' and `valgrind' checks are > very expensive. To disable all checking, `--disable-checking' or > `--enable-checking=none' must be explicitly requested. Disabling assertions > will make the compiler and runtime slightly faster but increase the risk of > undetected internal errors causing wrong code to be generated. > > > > > > > Where does it say I cannot build "C" and not "C++" without specifying > > --enable-languages=c --disable-build-with-cxx > --disable-build-poststage1-with-cxx --enable-stage1-languages=c > > which is in fact the case ? > > Where does it say that users should never use "--enable-checking=all" > with "--enable-bootstrap" ? Well, the docs don't say that you need any of --enable-checking to build GCC. And --enable-checking=all does exactly what is documented ;) For releases the default configuration is --enable-checking=release --enbale-stage1-checking=yes (to check the compiler but not slow down the final created compiler). So, if you don't know what you are doing just stick with the defaults ;) > And what has any of this to do with the simple question posed in the title > of this bug report : why can't insn-emit.c be split ?
