Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 17:57:42 +0100 (CET) From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: bde@zeta.org.au Cc: kris@obsecurity.org, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/mk sys.mk Message-ID: <200102241657.f1OGvhj03081@Magelan.Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0102241315540.25623-100000@besplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 24 Feb, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:53:52PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>> > > Hmm, that's not what's documented in the gcc info docs.
>> >
>> > The docs are wrong.
>> >
>> > > `-march=CPU TYPE'
>> > > Generate instructions for the machine type CPU TYPE. The choices
>> > > for CPU TYPE are the same as for `-mcpu'. Moreover, specifying
>> > > `-march=CPU TYPE' implies `-mcpu=CPU TYPE'.
>> >
>> > That's not true, test it on your own (see my previous mail with my test
>> > program) if you think the doc is right (or have a look at "man gcc" on a
>> > system with gcc 2.95.3 (e.g. a recent -current)).
>
> No, the docs are correct here.
But why are there different md5 sums in Message-ID:
<200102221150.f1MBopF07996@Magelan.Leidinger.net>?
> Don't look at "man gcc". It is not maintained except by non-FSF
> volunteers (see the WARNING section on the first page of it). In
> practice, this means that it hasn't changed significantly since
> rev.1.1.1.1 in 1994.
I know about the differences in "man gcc" and "info gcc", but the
documentation for x86 part of -march and -mcpu are significant similar.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
Yes, I've heard of "decaf." What's your point?
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net
GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102241657.f1OGvhj03081>