From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from pippin.tausq.org (gandalf.tausq.org [64.81.244.94]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1189B482D for ; Mon, 12 May 2003 15:59:17 -0600 (MDT) Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 14:58:37 -0700 From: Randolph Chung To: Guy Martin Cc: parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] gcc and -march=2.0 flag bug Message-ID: <20030512215837.GN4509@tausq.org> Reply-To: Randolph Chung References: <200305122351.57449.gmsoft@gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200305122351.57449.gmsoft@gentoo.org> Sender: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org Errors-To: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: > I had some problems with gcc. When I set the CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS -march=2.0, most > of the applications builded are b0rked. This occured on many stations. Using > -march=1.1 works well. How are they "b0rked"? Can you be a bit more precise? > Is this a 'feature' of unimplemented 64bit userspace or is this a bug ? > > In case of a bug, what do you need to debug it. We compile pa20 32-bit kernels (e.g. for c3k) using 32-bit and -march=2.0. seems to work. Do you have a test case for what you think is broken? -march2.0 is really orthogonal to 64-bit userspace. randolph -- Randolph Chung Debian GNU/Linux Developer, hppa/ia64 ports http://www.tausq.org/