This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFA: Build ARM eabi objects by default
- From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:16:22 +0000
- Subject: Re: RFA: Build ARM eabi objects by default
- Organization: GNU
- References: <20050316165443.GA6865@nevyn.them.org>
On Wed, 2005-03-16 at 16:54, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> A customer of ours noticed that invoking arm-eabi-as generates binaries that
> aren't marked as EABI ver4. It makes sense to me to try to get the default
> options right, if we're being invoked by hand instead of by gcc.
>
> Is this patch OK? Tested by running the gas testsuite on arm-elf,
> arm-linuxeabi, and arm-eabi; and by inspecting the default object flags on
> each of those platforms.
2005-03-16 Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@codesourcery.com>
* configure.tgt: Set emulation for arm-*-eabi*.
* config/tc-arm.c (meabi_flags): Check EABI_DEFAULT.
* config/te-armeabi.h: New file.
* config/te-armlinuxeabi.h (EABI_DEFAULT): Define.
* config/te-symbian.h: Include "te-armeabi.h".
This is OK. However,
diff -N config/te-armeabi.h
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ config/te-armeabi.h 16 Mar 2005 15:46:34 -0000
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+/* The EABI requires the use of VFP. */
+#define FPU_DEFAULT FPU_ARCH_VFP_V2
You might want to look at whether the code in md_begin() is doing the
right thing for you here.
R.