This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the newlib project.
Re: [patch] fix configure for powerpc altivec and spe
- From: Janis Johnson <janis_johnson at mentor dot com>
- To: Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn at redhat dot com>
- Cc: <newlib at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 11:21:42 -0700
- Subject: Re: [patch] fix configure for powerpc altivec and spe
- References: <51E57879 dot 9040406 at mentor dot com> <51E57B34 dot 3020106 at redhat dot com>
- Reply-to: <janisjo at codesourcery dot com>
On 07/16/2013 09:56 AM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 12:44 PM, Janis Johnson wrote:
>> Jeff wrote:
>>> Why have you removed vec_callocr.o and vec_reallocr.o from the list of
>>> extra_objects for altivec?
>>> Other than that, the patch looks fine.
>> I removed those objects from the list because they didn't build and I
>> had not noticed that there is indeed support for them in vec_mallocr.c.
>> Now I see that the rules in Makefile.in for building those two objects
>> are quite different from the rules for building the other objects; where
>> are those rules generated, and how would I tweak that for objects that
>> have different base names from the source file?
> It has to be done manually in Makefile.am. You can base it on one of the
> generated rules for another object, put it into Makefile.am (adding the
> additional define
> as needed and naming the object and source appropriately).
I'm confused. The old rules are for $(lpfx)whatever.o and the generated
rules for the objects with matching sources are for lib_a-whatever.o, but
the list of objects doesn't use "lib_a-", which I suppose means that they
are built using default rules instead of the ones in the Makefile. Should
the list in extra_objs use a prefix so they are built using the specific