On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 02:01:11PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:01:11 +0100 (BST) > From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: Thiemo Seufer <ths@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: CVS Update@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx: linux > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > > On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > > > > They are not in the info pages, but that should probably be considered an > > > accidental omission. Is using something that's documented but doesn't > > > work, to the contrary, any better? > > > > Probably not. It's just that I've never seen actual use of -mel/-meb yet. > > Good -- it means you haven't been watching over my shoulder. ;-) I've > used them several times for big-endian builds with my toolchain, which, as > you may be aware, has been exclusively little-endian so far. > > And they are actually used to implement these "-EL" and "-EB" options. > Frankly I find "-mel" and "-meb" more consistent with the others as "-m*" > generally imply target-specific options. -EB / -EL are traditionally the options that all MIPS compilers including non-gcc compilers, seem to support. Ralf
