On Thu, 1 Mar 2018, James Clarke wrote:
> x32, so it's not a *pure* system, but build=host=target=x32.
Well, “pure” x32 systems don’t exist, as it’s a userland-only
architecture, the kernel is simply amd64 for example. Same for
arm64ilp32 and arm64/aarch64 and perhaps(?) MIPS n32/n64.
Worse, x32
On Sat, 3 Mar 2018, Earnie wrote:
> Am I understanding correctly; your compiler is a 32bit compiler on a
> 64bit OS whose uname returns the 64bit OS system?
No, you aren’t.
My compiler is an x32 (amd64ilp32) compiler on an x32 host system.
The distinction in “32-bit” and “64-bit” didn’t work on
On 2/28/2018 7:53 PM, James Clarke wrote:
> On 1 Mar 2018, at 00:50, Ben Elliston wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 03:55:57PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>>
>>> I really have no other idea that???s in scope. After all,
>>> CC_FOR_BUILD is the *only* tool guaranteed to correspond to the
>>> t
