|
Message
From: Robert Millan<rmh@a...>
Date: Wed Jun 29 13:13:08 CEST 2005
Subject: [openrisc] status of OpenRISC
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 04:53:50PM +0200, Matjaz Breskvar wrote:
> > >> It should not be too hard to get the or32 target (I really dislikes
> > >> the or32 name; and I know some of the binutils hackers did as well) up
> > >> to date once again. Though my time is very limited right now.
> > >
> > > hm, what can we do about or32 name ? i don't think we want to change name
> > > now, but to even consider it what would be the alternative ('openrisc', just
> > > 'or',...)
> >
> > I'm not sure we can do anything at this point. But my personal
> > preference has always been "openrisc".
>
> why do you think openrisc is better than or32 ?
I'd also like to point out that binutils (both in upstream and in or1k CVS) is
ported twice with two different implementations under "or32" and "openrisc"
names.
And as I commented in another mail it's also defining EM_OR32 and EM_OPENRISC
macros separately with separate values (and only one of them is "92").
To be honest, I find this somewhat messy :).
--
Robert Millan
|
 |
Browse
