the 64-bit and 32-bit binaries just by the Elf class, a
proposed by H.J. above. This seems plausible given that it does capture
the differences correctly; everything else is the same, just the Elf
class. (And we use /lib vs /lib32 on the 64-bit platform to support the
32-bit shared libraries, etc.)
--
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com
On 2/16/2011 3:46 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>>> For what it's worth, the Tilera 64-bit architecture (forthcoming) includes
>>> support for a 32-bit compat
uild glibc. Seems
pretty yucky to me.)
Take a look at the "gcc and glibc from scratch" section of
http://www.tilera.com/scm/source.html . I don't know if this will handle
your problem, but we do end up with libgcc_eh.a when the dust settles, and
it avoids having to build uClibc :-)
--
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com
On 11/11/2011 1:09 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
2011-11-09 Chris Metcalf
* bits/byteswap.h (__bswap*): Use __builtin_bswap for gcc 4.3 and
above. Improves code generation for gcc 4.3 and 4.4 compilers
without bswap pattern detection.
This seems reasonable if some GCC folks can
On 11/11/2011 3:17 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Chris Metcalf wrote:
I'm cc'ing the gcc mailing list with this reply, so if someone there
can provide an authoritative statement, that would be great. It looks
like right now the i386/x86_64, ia64
