Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Sat, 13 Oct 2001 20:53:53 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: processor compatibility when building packages
Message-ID:	<20011013205353.A396@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20011013195937 DOT C31729 AT redhat DOT com> <20011014003337 DOT 29422 DOT qmail AT web14501 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20011014003337.29422.qmail@web14501.mail.yahoo.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.21i

On Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 10:33:37AM +1000, Danny Smith wrote:
>Thanks.  I must be misreading what "cpp_cpu_default" does then.  If
>configure without the cpu part of the triplet, that spec is left undefined,
>unless I do the defines I mentioned above.  Ahh, maybe it just affects
>*scheduling* of code rather than code generation, ie. (-mcpu=i686)!=
>(-march=i686).  

I asked a gcc engineer about that once and, IIRC, that is what he told
me.

cgf

- Raw text -