On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Milan Ton <milan....@yandex.ru> wrote: > > Nathan, Richard: > > sorry if it wasn't clear: my target was a 32-bit embedded system for that I > built two cross compilers to be run on two hosts -- linux32 and mingw32, my > build system was Fedora x86_64 (with gcc -m32 and i686-w64-mingw32-gcc > respectively). So Nathan's scheme was what I would have depicted: >> host:linux -> some (embedded) system >> host:mingw32 -> same (embedded) system
Ok, with the additional fact that you are building canandian crosses with build == linux-x86_64 in one case, I can't really say how to categorize the build != host 2nd case of using i686-w64-mingw32-gcc on x86_64-linux ;) A first step of the investigation would be to compare the configure results of both compiles (well, the tests relevant for target support). Richard. >> Yes, that's a reasonable expectation. The usually discovered cause of >> such differences is the host system's qsort function coupled with a >> comparison function that can return 0. When that happens things can be >> differently ordered, essentially at the whim of the host. And that can >> affet code generation. > > Thanks a lot for giving your explanation/ideas ! > >> If you could find a selfcontained testcase, that'd make a great bug >> report. > > I'll try to think of a reproducible test-case. > > Milan
