On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 04:39:41PM +0200, Martin Storsjö wrote:
On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Diego Biurrun wrote:
--- a/configure
+++ b/configure
@@ -1576,7 +1576,6 @@ fast_64bit_if_any="alpha ia64 mips64 parisc64 ppc64 sparc64
x86_64"
fast_clz_if_any="alpha avr32 mips ppc x86"
-inline_asm_deps="!tms470"
need_memalign="altivec neon sse"
@@ -4144,6 +4143,7 @@ elif enabled armcc; then
add_cflags -W${armcc_opt},--diag_suppress=513 # pointer sign
elif enabled tms470; then
add_cflags -pds=824 -pds=837
+ disable inline_asm
elif enabled pathscale; then
add_cflags -fstrict-overflow -OPT:wrap_around_unsafe_opt=OFF
elif enabled_any msvc icl; then
Probably ok, but why?
It's a more appropriate place. I could also squash the two patches and
call it all
configure: Move toolchain dependency declarations to a more appropriate place
Sure, then it makes more sense to me - ok with me with such a commit
message (either squashed or separately).
// Martin
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
