On 06/03/17 13:00, alan buckley wrote:
I’m looking at creating Raspberry Pi and VFP specific builds and package lists and have something working, but would just like to see if anyone has any objections before I check it in.
That all sounds reasonable to me. As far as shared libraries are concerned, there's not much point in building a VFP version if the library contains no FP; the dynamic linker will not fault a missing VFP version, but will instead look for a normal version. However, static builds are more problematic as the static linker doesn't allow the mixing of VFP/non-VFP object files. So will this force us to build VFP versions of all libraries regardless of FP content? Thanks, Lee. _______________________________________________ GCCSDK mailing list gcc@gccsdk.riscos.info Bugzilla: http://www.riscos.info/bugzilla/index.cgi List Info: http://www.riscos.info/mailman/listinfo/gcc Main Page: http://www.riscos.info/index.php/GCCSDK
