Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 22:32:59 +0200
From: Ronald de Man <deman AT win DOT tue DOT nl>
To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: pgcc... Do I really got it ?
Message-ID: <19990428223259.B28723@win.tue.nl>
References: <19990428201537 DOT A27287 AT win DOT tue DOT nl> <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 10 DOT 9904281936460 DOT 16107-100000 AT billabong DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9904281936460.16107-100000@billabong.demon.co.uk>; from John Hayward-Warburton on Wed, Apr 28, 1999 at 07:40:46PM +0000
X-Operating-System: Linux localhost 2.2.6 
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 28, 1999 at 07:40:46PM +0000, John Hayward-Warburton wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 28, 1999 at 06:58:18PM +0200, Olivier Tubach wrote:
> > > So.... do I really got pentium optimized code ? How do I recognize
> > > pentium-specific code (with file?)
> 
> My cheap and easy way:
> 
> I do a "less" on the resultant binary. At the end, one sees lots of
> things like:
> 
> GCC: (GNU) 2.6.4 snapshot 950518^@^@GCC: (GNU) 2.6.3^@^@
> 
> for a really old binary (I think the first number you see is the
> compiler that compiled the binary, and the rest are the libraries?)
> 
> GCC: (GNU) 2.7.2.3^@^@GCC: (GNU) 2.7.2.3^@
> 
> for something more recent,
> 
> but
> 
> GCC: (GNU) pgcc-2.91.66 19990314 (egcs-1.1.2 release)^@^@GCC: (GNU)
> pgcc-2.91.66 19990314 (egcs-1.1.2 release)^@^@GCC: (GNU)
> pgcc-2.91.60 19981201 (egcs-1.1.1 release)^^@^@^@^
> 
> for the latest stuff.
> 
> JHW
> 

This works for gcc (and gives output similar to `gcc -v`).
I think the question was how to recognize that an arbitrary
binary has been compiled with pentium optimizations. I know
of no way to determine this.

Ronald