From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Morten Welinder" Subject: Re: Handling of -specs in cgcc Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:43:27 -0400 Message-ID: <118833cc0807221043n215f5378pa3f97bdf75452d0a@mail.gmail.com> References: <118833cc0807221020m44938f77l70324a548baa4551@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.238]:23261 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752307AbYGVRn2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:43:28 -0400 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 69so1041800wri.5 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:43:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Alexey Zaytsev Cc: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, Morten Welinder > But won't gcc fail in such case? It will not fail, as gcc does not see any of it. But since the defines might not match what gcc runs with, you might get interesting effects. > Maybe we should not remove, but replace it > with a unique option to specify for which architecture sparse should check? That's certainly possible, but I would wait for an actual problem showing up before fixing anything. Right now, we can use -specs to get an idea what sparse would find for a different arch without actually having a gcc around that can cross compile. Morten