On 07/03/2012 02:54 PM, Adrian Smith wrote: > On 3 July 2012 14:54, Andrew Haley <aph@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 07/03/2012 01:53 PM, Adrian Smith wrote: >>> I'm sort-of worried by the "/32/" in that path there. Do I have >>> to specify something to make sure I'm building a 64-bit compiler? I >>> assume not, as my OS is 64-bit, the installed gcc which will be used >>> to build the first phase of bootstrapping is 64-bit, and the compiler >>> I built which worked outputted a 64-bit executable (at least according >>> to "file"). >> >> It's applying -mcmodel=medium to the 32-bit build. >> >> --disable-multilib > > Thanks for the response, that fixed it! > > Now I run into > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2012-02/msg00207.html > > which seems to be > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46250 > > So I think, from what I gather, this prevents gcc from being compiled > (or the libraries at least), therefore it's not possible to compile a > compiler capable of compiling programs generating >2GB executables, at > this time? It certainly looks like there are a lot of problems with the large memory model. These can be fixed, but right now I'm not sure I'd use it. Is it really really necessary to have such a large executable? Andrew.
