Mike, All, On Tuesday 07 April 2009 21:14:36 Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tuesday 07 April 2009 14:29:06 Yann E. MORIN wrote: > > Of course the processor variant we're building uClibc to run on matters! > that's the decision of the compiler and/or user, not uClibc. building uClibc > with a different CFLAG certainly does not mean "uClibc supports XXX cpu". > thus it does not care what processor *you're* compiling it for.
OK. I think we mis-understood each other. Apologies. > i dont think we should keep enabling lazy people. either the right options > are selected by gcc in their toolchain, or they should manually add the -mcpu > or whatever flags to their extra cflags. extending this crap in our build > system is a waste of time. I'm all for throwing away this mess as well. As new variants arrive, we'll add more of this stuff. And when one will try to compile with a gcc that is not recent enough, the -mcpu and -mtune options will not be recognised, and the build will break, and we'll be blamed for that. I'll try to come up with a patch to that effect later in the evening. Then we'll be able to discuss on sane grounds. Regards, Yann E. MORIN. -- .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | | +0/33 662376056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | | --==< ^_^ >==-- `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | `------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------' _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc