From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2026 10:21:45 +0000 (+0200)
Subject: install: Use AE spelling for "behavior"
X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=abb7e70024df110eaca30d227b584bd90bd3e845;p=thirdparty%2Fgcc.git

install: Use AE spelling for "behavior"

gcc:
	* doc/install.texi (Configuration): Use AE spelling for "behavior".
---

diff --git a/gcc/doc/install.texi b/gcc/doc/install.texi
index 406862b3195..5ce11ac3c0c 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/install.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/install.texi
@@ -1886,12 +1886,12 @@ On MIPS targets, make @option{-mlxc1-sxc1} the default when no
 On MIPS targets, make @option{-mno-lxc1-sxc1} the default when no
 @option{-mlxc1-sxc1} option is passed.  The indexed load/store
 instructions are not directly a problem but can lead to unexpected
-behaviour when deployed in an application intended for a 32-bit address
+behavior when deployed in an application intended for a 32-bit address
 space but run on a 64-bit processor.  The issue is seen because all
 known MIPS 64-bit Linux kernels execute o32 and n32 applications
-with 64-bit addressing enabled which affects the overflow behaviour
+with 64-bit addressing enabled which affects the overflow behavior
 of the indexed addressing mode.  GCC will assume that ordinary
-32-bit arithmetic overflow behaviour is the same whether performed
+32-bit arithmetic overflow behavior is the same whether performed
 as an @code{addu} instruction or as part of the address calculation
 in @code{lwxc1} type instructions.  This assumption holds true in a
 pure 32-bit environment and can hold true in a 64-bit environment if