This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [Revised patch] Rework MIPS command-line handling
> At 23 Jul 2002 18:04:32 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > email@example.com writes:
> > > At 23 Jul 2002 17:42:00 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > > > > Hmm. So, does gas then produce correct meabi binaries 'naturally' in
> > > > > this case?
> > > >
> > > > Sort of. The only checks of the ABI in gas are for:
> > >
> > > Err, so, does it handle/produce all of the relocations, etc. specified
> > > by that ABI properly? (doesn't sound like it, from what you said...)
> > Dunno off-hand. That was "sort of" as in "as well as gas knows how".
> > I certainly can't claim to have audited gas for ABI compliance.
> Well, if gas knows how 'well enough' it should support the flag.
But to turn your own question back on you, does it? Adding -mabi=eabi
at this stage might give the wrong impression.
> If there's no reason to add that special case, then best to avoid it
> up front.
If we did add -mabi=meabi now, it would be a no-op, i.e. the same as
specifying no -mabi switch at all. All the other -mabi flags leave some
sort of trace in the object file, but -mabi=meabi wouldn't. So MEABI is
going to be the odd one out one way or the other.
It would be nice to have some way of identifying MEABI code too.
I just think -mabi=meabi should wait until there is.