On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 4:01 PM David Edelson via Gcc wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 4:09 AM CHIGOT, CLEMENT via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Since no one answered, I assume that MULTILIB_REUSE was indeed not the
> > solution.
> > Thus, I've implemented a solution using a new tar
On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 4:09 AM CHIGOT, CLEMENT via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Since no one answered, I assume that MULTILIB_REUSE was indeed not the
> solution.
> Thus, I've implemented a solution using a new target macro MULTILIB_FALLBACK.
> It allows any target to return a new multilib su
Resent with the patch expanded correctly (I guess, it wasn't because of UTF-8
encoding...).
Hi everyone,
Since noone answered, I assume that MULTILIB_REUSE was indeed not the solution.
Thus, I've implemented a solution using a new target macro MULTILIB_FALLBACK.
It allows any target to return
Hi everyone,
Since noone answered, I assume that MULTILIB_REUSE was indeed not the solution.
Thus, I've implemented a solution using a new target macro MULTILIB_FALLBACK.
It allows any target to return a new multilib suffix based on the current
one being used by the algorithm. This solution is m
