> I don't think gcc ever exports any gmp code into its output. Rather, gcc
> just uses gmp for its own internal purposes.
I don't think that's my concern. My question is whether gcc will build
SSE-4.2 instructions into code just because the host can use them.
Seems something like that
On July 6, 2017 7:56:02 PM Andrew Dance wrote:
Hi all!
I've been tinkering with LFS on my Macbook Pro Retina and have managed to
get it booted up. However, I'm having trouble getting my wifi card to work.
It's a Broadcom bcm4360. There are 2 flavors, evidently.
On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 10:54:07AM -0700, Andrew Dance wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I've been tinkering with LFS on my Macbook Pro Retina and have managed to
> get it booted up. However, I'm having trouble getting my wifi card to work.
>
> It's a Broadcom bcm4360. There are 2 flavors, evidently.
On 06/07/2017 19:54, Andrew Dance wrote:
Hi all!
I've been tinkering with LFS on my Macbook Pro Retina and have managed
to get it booted up. However, I'm having trouble getting my wifi card
to work.
It's a Broadcom bcm4360. There are 2 flavors, evidently. Standard b43
drivers don't work
> So it must be the kernel's crypto functions tripping over it, and I
> can understand new instruction set evolutions wouldn't be
> backwards-compatible. Still, if gcc weren't trying to embed those
> instructions in the kernel and were just setting the kernel up to use
> gmplib, it seems more
Hi all!
I've been tinkering with LFS on my Macbook Pro Retina and have managed to
get it booted up. However, I'm having trouble getting my wifi card to work.
It's a Broadcom bcm4360. There are 2 flavors, evidently. Standard b43
drivers don't work on mine, so I have to use something called