On Apr 17, 9:09 pm, Bill Hart <[email protected]> wrote:
> I guess the idea of doing a 32 bit test if the 64 bit code fails is
> probably a sensible one. The CPUID should still be returned correctly.
Yep, that seems like the best solution to me.
> I too don't want to work around every broken system. However this is a
> case that GMP gets right and we don't, so I would say we should fix
> it.
I am sure there are other Linux boxen where the default gcc produces
binaries for the 32 bit ABI on a 64 bit box, so this seems like more
than a fix for an unusual configuration with pathscale's cc.
> Do you want to mimic what they do and we'll see if that works? If you
> like we can do a 1.1.1, fix the Windows issues once Brian gets to that
> and fix this issue and the test for stringinzing. Does configure set
> the define for that before config.guess is run? It looks like it is
> later in the configure run to me.
>
> I'll check out this pentium-D failure and see what is going on. If
> something needs fixing in 1.1.1 for that I'll commit that too.
Yeah, let's see if the Sage 3.4.1.rc4 build cycle flushes anything
else out of the woodworks. I should know in about 24 hours.
> We should have access to a new Sun server machine in the Sage lab here
> and I am guessing we'll be able to test on it. Despite being a T2000
> or something like that, it is not part of SkyNet.
>
> Bill
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"mpir-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
