From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailserv2.iuinc.com (IDENT:qmailr@mailserv2.iuinc.com [206.245.164.55]) by puffin.external.hp.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA25170 for ; Thu, 6 Jul 2000 12:05:10 -0600 Received: from ottawa.linuxcare.com (HELO localhost) (216.208.98.2) by mailserv2.iuinc.com with SMTP; 6 Jul 2000 18:06:32 -0000 To: law@cygnus.com Cc: parisc-linux@thepuffingroup.com Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] untested but building 64-bit toolchain, issues/questions References: <10808.962901043@upchuck> From: David Huggins-Daines Date: 06 Jul 2000 14:05:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: Jeffrey A Law's message of "Thu, 06 Jul 2000 10:30:43 -0600" Message-ID: <874s63p218.fsf@linuxcare.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-ID: Jeffrey A Law writes: > In message <873dlnl3f9.fsf@linuxcare.com>you write: > > > Yes, but I thought that 'hppa2.0w' means 64 bit by definition, so it > > > strikes me that the problem is with config.guess returning this. > > > > Oh, and one more thing. GCC thinks that hppa2.0w is a 64-bit target. > Err, no. Go look at the official GCC, GDB, binutils repositories. > > hppa2.0w is not considered a 64bit target by any of the tools. Urgh. Understood. This means that the gcc tree on puffin.external.hp.com CVS is quite out of date, which is sort of what I expected. I'm looking at the possibility of merging it now. On the subject of architecture strings: I know Matthew Wilcox has been pushing for using 'parisc-*-linux-gnu' and 'parisc64-*-linux-gnu' as the arch strings for 32 and 64 bit targets, and standardising on a 'linux' dialect of assembly language for both (basically 2.0 mnemonics). What would the chances of this being accepted by the binutils/gcc/autoconf maintainers be? (should I be asking this on another list? sorry...) We need to standardise on these things ASAP, since we are starting to build userspace, and we will be stuck with them very soon. -- dhd@linuxcare.com, http://www.linuxcare.com/ Linuxcare. Support for the revolution.