On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 15:16:06 +0100 Ken Moffat <zarniwh...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 12:01:14PM +0100, Hazel Russman wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:13:12 -0700 > > Paul Rogers <paulgrog...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > > > > Well, I continued and have just signed off a completely normal gcc test: > > only 1 unexpected error (in gcc itself, which I think I had the last time > > too), plus the 6 expected ones in libstdc++. I seem to have a sane > > toolchain. > > > Good ;-) > > > Interestingly gmp and mpfr both identify my machine as "nano-pc-linux-gnu" > > rather than x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, so Bruce is sort-of right when he calls it > > a different architecture. They both set themselves up to run with > > -march=nano -mtune=nano. What glibc thought it was building on, I have no > > idea, as I couldn't find a config.guess script in the package. > > > > I'm surprised by nano-pc-linux-gnu. > > But to find what -march=native will use, here are a couple of > answers from > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5470257/how-to-see-which-flags-march-native-will-activate > > (there were other suggestions too, of course) - > > The second answer suggested: > > gcc -march=native -E -v - </dev/null 2>&1 | grep cc1 > > and also, to see the defines: > > echo | gcc -dM -E - -march=native > > The third answer suggested: > > echo | gcc -### -E - -march=native > > > ĸen > -- For both 1 & 3, I get -march=nano -mtune=k8. The defines have x86_64, amd64 and k8 set but nothing for nano. I know that amd64 is used by Debian for all x86_64 processors, but k8 puzzles me. Isn't that also an amd processor? -- Hazel -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
