On 09/20/13 17:20, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 09/12/2013 03:22 AM, Víctor Martínez wrote:
Why is sjlj.o the only one built for armv4 while the rest of objects are armv5t?
Is this behaviour expected? Or is there something wrong trying to configure gcc
with these options?
There are co-processor
On 09/12/2013 03:22 AM, Víctor Martínez wrote:
> Why is sjlj.o the only one built for armv4 while the rest of objects are
> armv5t?
> Is this behaviour expected? Or is there something wrong trying to configure
> gcc
> with these options?
There are co-processor instructions in there that can't be
Hello all,
I have a doubt related to libitm.a and its objects. I hope this is the
right place to ask and get something clear.
We are crosscompiling gcc (4.7.3) for ARM using own crosstools built
from scratch.
This is the output from our current gcc built in our toolchain used to
rebuild gcc a
