[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: honoring gcc test stack size
From: |
Hans-Peter Nilsson |
Subject: |
Re: honoring gcc test stack size |
Date: |
Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:08:25 +0100 |
> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:20:38 -0600
> From: Joel Sherrill <address@hidden>
> Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > but
> > if so, it seems simplest to fake a simulator as:
> > set_board_info sim false
> >
> >
> I'll try that next.
In case it wasn't clear: don't forget to use that in a generic
but rtems-targeted sim baseboard-file, or "set_board_info sim
false" won't be of much use(*).
brgds, H-P
* Except when "src/sim" is included in your tree for your
architecture. (Now forget I said that, because it doesn't apply
to your setup; just for the record.)
- honoring gcc test stack size, Joel Sherrill, 2008/02/12
- Re: honoring gcc test stack size, Hans-Peter Nilsson, 2008/02/12
- Re: honoring gcc test stack size, Joel Sherrill, 2008/02/12
- Re: honoring gcc test stack size, Joel Sherrill, 2008/02/13
- Re: honoring gcc test stack size, Hans-Peter Nilsson, 2008/02/13
- Re: honoring gcc test stack size, Joel Sherrill, 2008/02/13
- Re: honoring gcc test stack size, Hans-Peter Nilsson, 2008/02/13
- Re: honoring gcc test stack size, Joel Sherrill, 2008/02/13
- Re: honoring gcc test stack size,
Hans-Peter Nilsson <=
- RE: honoring gcc test stack size, Dave Korn, 2008/02/13
- Re: honoring gcc test stack size, Hans-Peter Nilsson, 2008/02/13