GAS patch for sh*-unknown-linux-gnu

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 11:09:28PM -0400, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> To me, it seems that you (Niibe) are right in that sh-linux is
> always little-endian.  Refer to ASM_SPEC in
> gcc/config/sh/linux.h.  Making it the default for sh-linux seems
> it would only make things simpler, for people who need to write
> mixed assembly and C.

There's some argument ongoing that sh-linux should be default little
endian but generally flexible, and that if you only want one endianness
you should configure for sh?e[bl].  I'm not sure I agree with that
argument, though.

> I'm not really sure about using "sh*eb-*-linux*" to denote a
> GNU/Linux system using big endian code and data.  Is this triple
> new or has it been used somewhere else?  I'm not sure I can
> approve it if it's new.  Do we need it; do you know of any
> GNU/Linux big endian variant?  It's not used in e.g. bfd.  Is
> there an existing (non-SH-based) port where sh* would collide?
> Can Ben Elliston, the config.* maintainer, shed some light?

It's been in use in at least some community trees for a while now.  We
at MontaVista support a couple of big-endian SH3/SH4 GNU/Linux targets
now.

Configurewise, we build tools for sh?e[bl].  We then build all user
applications for sh-*-*.  It's a little hokey, but it seems to work
very well; applications don't really Need To Know which SH they are
built for, and this lets us make tools that default to the correct
target for the given port.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer