Re: powerpc*le-linux support

[Alan Modra]

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 01:16:04PM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
> I guess I'm just thoroughly confused, but in my world there ought to
> be four variations of $host; 64- or 32-bit, and big or little endian.
> 
> This patch seems to only handle builds going from 64-bit to 32-bit
> ($host powerpc64-* and 32-bit output) and compiles going from 32-bit
> to 64-bit ($host powerpc-* and 64-bit output).
> 
> Both of those cases ought to be cross compiles. But I don't get why you
> apparently do not need to give any -m option to ld when you cross-compile
> from 32-bit little-endian to 32-bit big-endian and from 64-bit l-e to
> 64-bit b-e? Is the user required to provide the appropriate -m option
> manually in that case? Why is it important to be more helpful for
> crosses over the 32/64 boundary?

Yes, we might need to handle those cases too.  I've only just started
looking into the cross-endian multilib support in gcc..

As to why the cases I handled are more important:  On a powerpc64le
linux host where the compiler defaulted to producing 64-bit objects
(which is how we generally build compilers nowadays) libtool added
-m elf64ppc to $LD here.  Being the option for 64-bit big-endian, that
caused complete failure for *native* 64-bit little-endian.  Which is
where the action is at the moment.

-- 
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM