Only vapier will have a clue about this one. Some time ago, you added the machines mips64vr5900 and mips64vr5900el to the upstream GNU config.sub file. Here's the changeset. http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/config/config/config.sub?r1=1.325&r2=1.326 The mipsEE*|ee|ps2 targets aren't included in the upstream file but when installing gnuconfig, Gentoo seems to patch it with a file called config.sub.ps2.patch. I'm not sure where this comes from. In any case, I think this patch may have a slight problem. In the patch, basic_machine is set to mips64r5900el, not mips64vr5900el - note the missing v. I think this could cause potential problems if you try to use mipsEE*|ee|ps2 as a target. I've started using mips64vr5900el instead, which should be okay anyway but I thought I'd better report this.
actually, the patch i sent upstream did not include the v ... when the maintainer merged it, he added the v "for me"
Ah okay. So you'll add the v to the other patch? I'll leave it up to you to decide. Thanks. (-:
After getting a little further with building the toolchain (I've been having various problems), I've realised that mips64vr5900el actually doesn't work. GAS complains that "Vr5900" isn't a valid CPU type or something. I didn't realise it actually used the name in that way. I've gone back to using mipsEEel and that does work. Maybe we should drop the v then or at least allow both?
binutils gas will only accept mips64vr or mips64vrel ... it wont accept anything else that starts with mips64vr ... mipsEEel works because gas will accept mips*-linux*-* i think in the end, we should go with mipsEEel-* as our base CHOST
This doesn't really need to be reopened but I just want to say that after toing and froing with Ben Elliston since August, with him changing his mind three times, I finally managed to convince him to add r5900. See the URL. I know gnuconfig was bumped recently but another one would be appreciated. Thanks.
