Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 10:07:39 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: gcc-3.0 related patches for DJGPP CVS version
In-Reply-To: <20010429082104.A543@lauras.lt>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010429095037.26520H-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Laurynas Biveinis wrote:

> I think we should keep these switches, but with alignment increased
> to cater p3-p4 and k7

Can you suggest the options that you think are the best?

Should we ask the GCC maintainers for suggestions?

> Of course in this case these switches should go into specs too.

Not necessarily: building a library could involve considerations which 
don't apply to applications on a Joe Random User's machine.

> And there are a few new interesting options, like -m128bit-long-double.

In what version of GCC?  I cannot find it anywhere in the docs of GCC 
2.95.3.