From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:44:50 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] Re: Problem building U-Boot for ARM target
In-Reply-To: <434BBC9A.2020904@softool.ch> (Paolo Broggini's message of
 "Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:22:34 +0200")
References: <434B830B.4020405@softool.ch> <tnxhdboz6cs.fsf@arm.com>
	<434BACC0.4090708@softool.ch> <tnx4q7oz0av.fsf@arm.com>
	<434BBC9A.2020904@softool.ch>
Message-ID: <tnxmzlgxj59.fsf@arm.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Paolo Broggini <pbroggini@softool.ch> wrote:
>   1) PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS +=$(call cc-option,-mapcs-32,-mabi=apcs-gnu)
>      -> gcc complains about '-mabi=apcs-gnu' (see my original mail)
>
>   2) PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS +=$(call cc-option,-g,-mabi=apcs-gnu)
>      -> everything compiles fine, the option used is '-g'
>
>   3) PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS +=$(call cc-option,-mapcs-32,-g)
>      -> everything compiles fine, the option used is '-mapcs-32'

Very weird. A 'make' bug maybe? I don't see why 1 and 3 checks return
different options. If you write a shorter version in 1 like -mapbi=a,
would it make any difference?

-- 
Catalin