Re: More crosstool-0.42-glibc-2.4-gcc-4.1.0-nptl

[Robert Schwebel <robert at schwebel dot de>]

On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 02:48:15PM +0100, Steven Newbury wrote:
> I've not tried non-EABI NPTL, going EABI will of course break
> everything.. ;-) Maybe somebody here has..?

I've changed nothing but the cpu type in the config files. 

> Debian is working on an ARM EABI/NPTL distribution I don't know if
> that's much help to you though?

I suppose not, because they usually compile natively, not cross. And I'm
just too lazy to wait until a 50 MHz ARM machine has compiled all 13000
debian unstable packets ;) 

> > No, we mainly use PXA255, PXA270, h720x, i.MX, netX and NetSilicon CPUs.
> > The thing is that, for a generic ARM softfloat toolchain, it should be
> > generic. And setting the cpu to strongarm gave us toolchains which
> > worked on all these architectures. 
>
> If you want to continue targetting strongarm you may have to tweak binutils a
> little. 

We don't really use strongarm, it was just the one who supported all of
the above SoCs. Btw, why is there a difference on a per-SoC base,
shouldn't that be something like ARMv4 vs. ARMv5 etc? 

> I'll take a look if I get a moment.  StrongARM is the closest common
> architecture for them all then? You maybe best to just build a
> completely generic ARM toolchain with mutlilib and use multiple spec
> files?

That would be pretty cool; until now I just followed the lazy path and
used what crosstool provided, which was non-multilib and strongarm
optimization. 

Robert
-- 
 Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de
 Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry
   Handelsregister:  Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686
     Hannoversche Str. 2, 31134 Hildesheim, Germany
   Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |  Fax: +49-5121-206917-9


--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq