binutils-uClibc followup patch
Dan Kegel
dank@kegel.com
Fri Dec 26 04:57:00 GMT 2003
Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 04:09:05PM -0800, Carl Miller wrote:
>
>>>>Agree with the intent of the patches. I cannot build binutils however. I
>>>>configure with --target=i386-pc-linux-uclibc but I get the following error
>>>>when building:
>
> Is there any reason not to use the obvious "simple, no patching needed"
> tuple: i386-uclibc-linux-gnu ?
Which brings up the question: how about I start using the tuple
i386-glibc-linux-gnu
for crosstool's glibc toolchains, just to be uniform?
That second field is supposed to be for vendor name, but in the free
software world, the C library name seems like a good thing to stick there...
There is one small hitch: on the ppc, I've been using that second
field to indicate cpu type, since ppc405-unknown-linux-gnu doesn't
work. Maybe I should submit gcc/glibc/binutils patches to allow ppc405
etc. in the first field...
- Dan
------
Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
More information about the crossgcc
mailing list