This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Dan Kegel wrote: > Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > credit where credit is due, it was a private e-mail from michael > > that pointed me at the appropriate architecture makefile as the > > source for some unwanted compiler options when trying to run the > > *native* compiler. > > How about posting a patch to fix the kernel sources, now that you've > found the problem? but, again, is this really the direction you want to take? it could conceivably require one patch per architecture, whereas the sanitized headers seem like such a simpler and safer solution. and patching the kernel source might not be a one-time thing as some future feature might screw up the build process yet again. why take the chance? rday ------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |