build failure for ia64 (due to -Werror)

Alan Modra amodra@bigpond.net.au
Sat Mar 19 18:37:00 GMT 2005


On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 06:04:18PM -0800, James E Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 17:23, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > This is wrong.  bfd_uint64_t does not require a 64-bit BFD, only a native
> > 64-bit type (be it long long or long).
> 
> Another thing I find confusing here, if what you say is right, then why
> did Alan go to all of the trouble of removing all 64-bit types from the
> elfNN_ia64_relax_brl function last month?  I am assuming there is a
> reason why he made such a large change, when a much simpler one could
> have been made if you are right.  Perhaps my assumption is wrong.

I did more than strictly necessary, that's all.  Andreas is correct that
elfxx-ia64.c only needs a 64-bit host type and minor changes.  Larger
changes are needed, along the lines of my relax_brl patch, if the 32-bit
version of elfxx-ia64.c is to compile without a 64-bit host type.
Sorry to add to the confusion..

-- 
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre



More information about the Binutils mailing list