Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Will a 64-bit-no-multilib machine cross-compile 32-bit code?
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 22:19:15
Message-Id: CAJ0EP43qFSgO5ZDG1Oc-_7eGUgN_egp3Pp1j=j74E5b0h-wCYQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Will a 64-bit-no-multilib machine cross-compile 32-bit code? by Walter Dnes
1 On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> wrote:
2 > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 09:25:53PM -0400, Fernando Rodriguez wrote
3 >
4 >> I guess gcc devs are careful when using the model numbers (Intel
5 >> lists 3 for Atoms, gcc uses only two so that may account for the
6 >> models I mentioned) but the chance of error is there. The -mno-xxx
7 >> flags would safeguard against it.
8 >
9 > I have one of the earliest Atom chips. Some people have a hard time
10 > believing this, but it's a 32-bit-only chip; a couple of lines from
11 > /proc/cpuinfo
12 >
13 > model name : Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU Z520 @ 1.33GHz
14 > address sizes : 32 bits physical, 32 bits virtual
15 >
16 > Intel gives the CPU's specs at...
17 >
18 > http://ark.intel.com/products/35466/Intel-Atom-Processor-Z520-512K-Cache-1_33-GHz-533-MHz-FSB
19 >
20 > ...where it specifically says...
21 >
22 > Intel 64 # No
23 >
24 > I want to make absolutely certain that "illegal instructions" are not
25 > compiled for it.
26
27 You will probably need to add -m32 to CFLAGS to avoid building 64-bit
28 objects on the 64-bit machine.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Will a 64-bit-no-multilib machine cross-compile 32-bit code? Fernando Rodriguez <frodriguez.developer@×××××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-user] Will a 64-bit-no-multilib machine cross-compile 32-bit code? Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org>