Message-Id: <199704141230.OAA19178@math.amu.edu.pl>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
From: "Mark Habersack" <grendel AT hoth DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
Organization: PPP (Pesticide Powered Pumpkins)
To: Gisle Vanem <giva AT bgnett DOT no>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 13:33:10 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Using -m486
Reply-to: grendel AT hoth DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl
CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <199704140801.IAA11468@bryggen.bgnett.no>

Once upon a time (on 14 Apr 97 at 8:01) Gisle Vanem said:

> How can I determine if my C-source is complile using the `-m486' option. I
> was thinking of using it along these lines:
> 
>   inline unsigned long _htonl (unsigned x)
>   {
>   #if defined(-m486)
>     return bswap(x);    /* 486+ instruction */
>   #else
>     return htonl(x);
>   #endif
>   }
> 
> When compiling with `gcc -V', there's no extra define for `-m486'.
You may fiddle a little with the lib/specs file. There is no documentation 
for it AFAIK, but you should be able to determine how to add a conditional 
switch to define M486 or M386. Beware however, that this introduces a serious 
incompatibility to your program - you'd have to be sure that everyone 
compiling your program uses your specs as well. Besides, why would you need 
such a macro?
==================================================
Stand straight, look me in the eye and say goodbye
Stand straight, we drifted past the point of
  reasons why.
Yesterday starts tommorow, tommorow starts today
And the problems seem to be we're picking up the
  pieces of a ricochet...