> On 24 Nov 2016, at 22:26, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 11/24/2016 11:05 PM, Aaro Koskinen wrote: >> I think that's your job to try. If you want to "add 64-bit support" >> (instead of forcing it to everybody), do the required changes so that >> it's still works for everybody without extra fiddling. > > Don't be so rude, I'm not forcing anything onto anyone. > >>>> Also you broke the tilo build... >>> >>> Not here. Just tried it again and it builds fine. Can you be more specific? >> >> The same issue as with silo. > > Don't you think your statements are a bit misleading then? I didn't break anything, > I changed the default target to 64-bit which is somewhat reasonable in the year > 2016, isn't it. > > Or are you going to tell me now that your 333 MHz, 128 MiB RAM Sun Ultra 5 is > your everyday production machine? Part of the problem is not forcing 64-bit, but that the Makefile is inconsistent. The default CC is gcc without any flags, but ld is given -m elf64_sparc. If you are running with sparc32 as your default target, gcc will generate 32-bit files but ld expects 64-bit. If you really want to force 64-bit, you should also pass appropriate -m64/-64 flags to gcc/as. However, I think the sensible, least controversial solution is to just drop the -m elf64_sparc and let everything be the default. It was only changed to force 32-bit in c836dbda because 64-bit support wasn’t present. Regards, James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
