[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Two-month patch ping: Re: powerpc*le-linux support

From: Gary V. Vaughan
Subject: Re: Two-month patch ping: Re: powerpc*le-linux support
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 21:34:10 +0700

Hi Peter,

On Aug 22, 2013, at 8:58 PM, Peter Rosin <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 2013-08-22 10:20, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>> On Aug 22, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Peter Rosin <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> On 2013-08-22 09:40, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>>>>> Can we please get this simple patch pushed?
>>>> Done.
>>> To me, it appears as if what you actually pushed was not what was posted?
>> I am an idiot.  Thanks for the heads up, fixed in the following change set.
> Still not right though, sorry.

Indeed.  I am still an idiot.  I am the one who needs to apologise here, thank
you for paying attention and catching it so quickly.

Note to self: make sure to only apply patches directly from emails from now on.

> You ended up doing:
> -       ppc64-*linux*|powerpc64-*linux*)
> +       powerpcle-*)
> +         LD="${LD-ld} -m elf32lppclinux"
> +         ;;
> +       powerpc-*)
> but the original wanted:
> -       ppc64-*linux*|powerpc64-*linux*)
> +       powerpc64le-*)
> +         LD="${LD-ld} -m elf32lppclinux"
> +         ;;
> +       powerpc64-*)
> But, the originally supplied version confuses me yet again, so I'm not
> committing the fix myself...
> How can it be correct to say "-m elf32lppclinux" (32-bit) when $host is
> explicitly 64-bit? That seems like utter garbage to me. What am I
> missing this time?

I don't get it either, and I can't test it.  I trust the ppcle community
will commence shouting if the patches have done something horrible. However,
if there is any nonsense here, it predates my recent patch butchering,
because even the pre-patched code seems to mix 32bit and 64bit concepts

If someone would like to apply (or send me) a patch that adds a comment
explaining why this code needs to look so odd, that would be very helpful!

Hopefully the repository at least reflects the changes you wanted now in
any case.  Sorry for the earlier sloppiness.

Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT gnu DOT org)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]