From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f2MJM5U08105 for linux-mips-outgoing; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 11:22:05 -0800 Received: from mail.foobazco.org (snowman.foobazco.org [198.144.194.230]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f2MJM4M08102 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 11:22:05 -0800 Received: by mail.foobazco.org (Postfix, from userid 1014) id 178F8109CE; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 11:22:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 11:22:29 -0800 From: Keith M Wesolowski To: nick@snowman.net Cc: Justin Carlson , linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: Embedded MIPS/Linux Needs Message-ID: <20010322112229.A5617@foobazco.org> References: <01032211025209.20180@plugh.sibyte.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from nick@snowman.net on Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 02:03:43PM -0500 Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 02:03:43PM -0500, nick@snowman.net wrote: > (It sorta produces useable code... usually..... on tuesdays... if it's a > blue moon) gcc 3.0 for mips64 requires hacks to even accept the arguments the kernel compile wants to give, and even then it reliably produces extremely incorrect code. For example: int i = 0; prom_printf ("%d", i); Might yield something like -14777223 - basically, anything but 0. The code that causes this is horribly wrong that it wasn't even worth looking at. There are all sorts of similar, related, and dissimilar problems. On the other hand, the same compiler for mips (not 64) reliably produces working 2.4 kernels... -- Keith M Wesolowski http://foobazco.org/~wesolows ------(( Project Foobazco Coordinator and Network Administrator ))------ "I should have crushed his marketing-addled skull with a fucking bat."