On 21/02/11 10:12, Guillem Jover wrote:
This was already discussed in this list some time ago [0]. But it came
up again when restarting the discussion for the proposed new armhf port
for Debian.
[0]http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-07/msg00179.html
My arguments for why a distinct triplet is
Here is an amended patch that handles Ada as EABI-only on ARM.
Are there any other comments on the appropriateness of this globbing change?
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the
Hi!
On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 16:12:32 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
Here is an amended patch that handles Ada as EABI-only on ARM.
diff --git a/gcc/ada/gcc-interface/Makefile.in
b/gcc/ada/gcc-interface/Makefile.in
index b64ba55..7559efb 100644
--- a/gcc/ada/gcc-interface/Makefile.in
+++
Guillem Jover writes:
On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 17:59:06 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
if you'd consider accepting something ressembling the attached patch
A pre-existing condition, but in general where the code you're changing
hardcodes
Hi!
This was already discussed in this list some time ago [0]. But it came
up again when restarting the discussion for the proposed new armhf port
for Debian.
[0] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-07/msg00179.html
My arguments for why a distinct triplet is needed can be found in [1],
it's a big
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
if you'd consider accepting something ressembling the attached patch
A pre-existing condition, but in general where the code you're changing
hardcodes gnu that's wrong - arm*-*-linux-uclibceabi is also meant to be
valid. So if you allow a suffix
On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 17:59:06 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
if you'd consider accepting something ressembling the attached patch
A pre-existing condition, but in general where the code you're changing
hardcodes gnu that's wrong -
