[RESEND] [PATCH] Better vxWorks support in longlong.h

[Mark Haigh]

Kevin Ryde wrote:

>Mark Haigh <mhaigh at sonicwall.com> writes:
>  
>
>>Can I beg you to reconsider,
>>    
>>
>
>You don't like those words?  
>
>  
>
Not particularly  :-)

>>and put up a patch against 4.1.2 with the
>>removed PPC and added __PPC__ and __ppc?
>>    
>>
>
>What were you saying about gcc 2.7.x though?
>
>  
>
>>This way just about everybody is fixed and I can put this into
>>gcc-3.4.
>>    
>>
>
>I'll review anything you can get gcc to adopt, but I'm pretty inclined
>to go the HAVE_HOST_CPU_FAMILY route, for maximum simplicity.
>
>gcc and gmp longlong.h are not quite identical, we tweak it around a
>bit for various extra support routines we use, or for micro
>optimizations based on exact cpu types (which gcc doesn't necessarily
>differentiate).
>
>  
>

The HAVE_XXX way is the way to go.  We both know that.  The only thing I 
really want is to be able to put up a GMP patch for vxWorks that I can 
then submit into the GCC 3.4 branch.  GMP users can use the vxWorks 
patch to build GMP vxWorks, and GCC 3.4 would build for vxWorks.

The GCC team has no real problems with the changes:  
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-03/msg00806.html

Thanks for your reply,

Mark F. Haigh
mfhaigh at acm.org