On Friday 01 December 2006 4:36 pm, Daniel Glöckner wrote: > On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 05:29:11AM -0800, tike64 wrote: > > Thanks for hint. Why wasn't -lm needed when host machine was i386? > > Glibc on i386 has ldexp in libc.so.6 as well as in libm.so.6, so -lm is > not needed. > > Are you trying to compile it on Linux? > > > tcc.c:9505:2: warning: #warning add arch specific rt_get_caller_pc() > > > > Hope that is not critical. > > It's not critical. I didn't implement it because the TCC stackframe is > not the same as the one produced by GCC, so backtraces would show only > TCC compiled functions.
I yanked it entirely from my version. Might add it back in a seperate (optional) file, but for right now it looked like unnecessary complication. > > arm-linux-gcc -O2 -Wall -c -o libtcc1.o libtcc1.c > > libtcc1.c:140:2: #error unsupported CPU type > > There are several reasons why ARM isn't supported by libtcc1 in the > official TCC distribution: > > 1. TCC has no ARM assembler Ah. I wonder what would be involved in adding one? > 2. ARMv4 has no instructions for divisions > 3. There are more functions needed in libtcc1 for ARM than for i386 > 4. libgcc1.a or libgcc1_s.so can be used instead > > If you don't use the EABI patch that I posted some weeks ago, you can > use the libtcc1 from my homepage: > http://www.stud.uni-hannover.de/~daniel/tcc/ Um, hang on. I merged the EABI patch into my tree (pretty sure I did), but the copy I have still seems to have a funky 386-only libtcc1.c. I glanced at your libtcc1 source and it's got a big .S file, so until tcc grows an arm assembler it can't recompile itself with that. > I prefer to just ln -s libgcc1_s.so to libtcc1.a. That's one way, but I'm still hoping someday to bootstrap a Linux system (recompile it from source code) without any gnu code in it at all. > > Building bcheck fails also. Why does it try to build that when it > > doesn't in case of i386 host? > > The Makefile is stupid. > Bounds checking is not supported for ARM. > Feel free to add support for it. That's a debug feature. I'm not so worried about that just yet. > Daniel > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tinycc-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel > > -- "Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
