[uClibc]Re: Strange busybox/uClibc problem

Erik Andersen andersen at codepoet.org
Thu Jun 27 19:51:03 UTC 2002


On Thu Jun 27, 2002 at 02:47:07PM -0400, Paul Komarek wrote:
> Thanks, Martin.  I had thought it was the other way around.  Because of
> what you've writen, I did some more checks and indeed the problem was not
> how uClibc was compiled, but how busybox and tinylogin were compiled.  In
> particular, the compiler wrapper created by uClibc does use the arch flag.
> gcc-uClibc.h has TARGET_ARCH devined (as i386 in my case), but
> gcc-uClibc.c doesn't reference this macro (the gcc-uClibc Makefile does,
> but only for determining paths).
> 
> Given Martin's correction, my question now becomes "shouldn't the
> gcc-uClibc.c specify -march=TARGET_ARCH"?

That like reasonable request.  Anybody have a problem with
this?

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen             http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--



More information about the uClibc mailing list