From: Eric Botcazou <ebotca...@adacore.com> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 22:31:53 +0200
>> If one wants a 32-bit default compiler, they should build for the >> sparc-linux target. And this is absolutely trivial to make happen >> in the environments where this is supposedly a problem. > > I have criticized so many times this combination in the past, while Jakub and > also you IIRC were defending it, that I find it a bit strange that the table > have been turned like that... The last time I discussed these kind of issues with you, I wanted us to consider allowing the compiler to change it's output default based upon the output of 'uname'. This is effectively what Linux distributions on Sparc do, they provide a special 'gcc' binary that looks at uname's output and munges the command line to the real 'gcc' as needed. If the primary users of gcc for this target are going to play these games anyways, better to provide the facility in the gcc sources itself. Anyways, that is a seperate discussion. >> We could allow it for compatability, but I'd prefer not to. > > I beg to differ though. Breaking backward compatibility should be the last > resort solution; restoring it in this case appears to be totally harmless. Agreed, please install this patch if you haven't already. Thanks Eric.
