ppc-eabi with gcc-3.0.4

[Vermeulen Jan]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Korn [mailto:dkorn@pixelpower.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 26 februari 2002 11:22
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Vermeulen Jan [mailto:Jan.Vermeulen@siemens.atea.be]
> >Sent: 26 February 2002 07:30
> 
> >So, what does the "und" stand for and what will I be missing from my
> >crosscompiler because I manually removed it?
> >
> >There were others too which build fine, called "ca", "nof", 
> "le" etc. I can
> >guess the use of some of them ("le" = little endian libs?, "nof" = no
> >floating point?) But not "und" and "ca".
> 
>   Yep, you're spot on for nof and le, they exist in 2.95.x 
> with the same> meaning.  I haven't heard of the others, but the way to
find out is to
> find out which one of the $srcdir/gcc/config/rs6000/t-* files 
> is being 
> selected in the top level configure, and read it to see which 
> flags are
> passed to the build for that multilib variant.  In 2.95.x the file
> will be t-ppcgas, and (digging it up) aha:  "ca" means AIX calling 
> conventions:
> 
> ---begin quote---
> MULTILIB_OPTIONS	= msoft-float \
> 			  mlittle/mbig \
> 			  mcall-sysv/mcall-aix/mcall-linux
> 
> MULTILIB_DIRNAMES	= nof \
> 			  le be \
> 			  cs ca lin
> ----end quote----
> 
>   What's in the v3 equivalent then?


Ah, thanks for the pointer... I checked it out and I see:

<quoting>
MULTILIB_OPTIONS = msoft-float \
                   mlittle/mbig \
                   mcall-sysv/mcall-aix \
                   fleading-underscore

MULTILIB_DIRNAMES = nof \
                    le be \
                    cs ca \
                    und
</quoting>

So, i guess that some libraries will not have been made.
But which ones? The ones containing leading underscores for the functions or
those without them?
I have a feeling this isn't a big problem, because GCC can work with both
types.

The -fleading-underscore and -fno-leading-underscore flags will link against
the 'und' libraries or others.

My guess is that, since the normal way of compiling C is to add an
underscore before the symbol (from the GCC point of view), those missing
'und'-type libraries are those which symbols do not have an underscore.

The only use of these libs are to mix them with assembly code...

Is this somewhat correct? Is there a simple way of testing which libs are
actually missing?

Jan

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com