Re: Re: GCC problem, take two

On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 12:36:12PM -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, T. Ribbrock wrote:
> 
> > Hm - that leads me to a question: If the sparc64 (or whatever the
> > "default" gcc is called) gcc is broken on both sparc64 and sparc32
> > (and failing to compile a file in this manner *is* broken in my eyes),
> > then why isn't gcc-sparc32 the default compiler and gcc-sparc64 the
> > add-on package?
> 
> It probably should be.  

gcc is able to compile both sparc32 and sparc64 code, gcc-sparc32 is not.
You need to compile sparc 64-bit code, at least for the kernel
if not anything else.

Can anyone please test the patch I posted URL for to see whether
it fixes the bug?

	Jakub