Subject: Re: MACHINE_ARCH on mips
To: Jonathan Stone <>
From: Jason Thorpe <>
List: tech-toolchain
Date: 07/26/1998 13:43:30
On Sun, 26 Jul 1998 13:31:42 -0700 
 Jonathan Stone <jonathan@DSG.Stanford.EDU> wrote:

 > It's not ``clearly wrong''.  We're still having the discussion because
 > the same issue was discussed elsewhere on April 2. (We even reached
 > closure on that in April, when discussing CPP predefines, and you
 > stipulated that ${MACHINE_ARCH} on mips systems should be "mips", as
 > far as I can see.)
 > There was explicit suggestion that CPP should be  defining
 > 	__NetBSD__
 > 	__${MACHINE_ARCH}__
 > 	__${ENDIANNESS}__	/* or __${ENDIANESS} */
 > cgd said that he didn't consider endian-ness issues when defining
 > ${MACHINE_ARCH}, didn't recall it coming up, and that leaving
 > ${MACHINE_ARCH} as "mips" on mips systems is a reasonable choice.

So the MIPS is a special case.  Treat it that way, geez.  On all but
MIPS, it's:


...on MIPS:

	-D__MIPSEB__ or -D__MIPSEL__ based on toolchain default or -EB or -EL.

...then document the special case, and how it conforms to existing conventions
used for that processor.

Jason R. Thorpe                             
NASA Ames Research Center                            Home: +1 408 866 1912
NAS: M/S 258-5                                       Work: +1 650 604 0935
Moffett Field, CA 94035                             Pager: +1 650 940 5942