This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Dimitry, I applied the arm-softfloat.patch from your website and performed a crosstool build for gcc-3.4.3-glibc-2.3.4. I believe the VFP format is being used, because an fprintf of a floating number produces the *huge* result shown elsewhere, however, even with the softfloat patch it looks as though the VFP format flag is not getting set in the ELF header (should be 0x600 and its still at 0x200). - Should the softfloat patch update the ELF header to report VFP format or is this still missing ? - I assume that I need to also copy the glibc-vfp.patch forward to glibc-2.3.4 to solve the fprintf 1.0 problem ? Thanks, Scott. On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 21:46:00 +0200 Dimitry Andric <dimitry@andric.com> wrote: > On 2005-04-07 at 20:44:49 J. Scott Merritt wrote: > > > I am having FPA/VFP mismatch difficulties when trying to link with the > > Intel IPP library (which reports VFP). I *believe* the most relevant > > comments are below. Has this patch been included in newer versions of > > crosstool or gcc ? (e.g. crosstool-0.30 with gcc-3.4.3) Thanks again :) > > The comments and patch are relevant, yes. It works for me, but since > the patch changes the default FP behaviour of the compiler, it's not > included in crosstool. Or it might be, but put somewhere in an > "optional" directory. :) > ------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |