Linux Montavista versus crosstool
Wed Mar 28 13:18:00 GMT 2007
Thank you very much for your opinions and suggestions. Probably
very soon I will use the same toolchain for all (kernel and the
applications). Right now as ai said I just wanted to have a quick start to
see that something is working.
I would appreciate also your opinions about toolchains. Which one you
would recommend to me. I would like to cross compile and to cross link all
on my PC (Scientific Linux 3) for power PC 405 processor.
Right now I have tried with crosstool which was quit easy to build.
I do not know yet if the executables build by crosslinker work on my
Xilinx board since I do not have it right now with me.
First of all I wanted to learn how to start with it.
Once again many thanks
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Cliff Brake wrote:
> On 3/28/07, Miroslaw Dach <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Hi Cliff,
> > Thnaks for the suggestion. I understand the point. Righ now I just
> > wanted to have a "quick" test with montavista. The advantage wich I see is
> > the real-time kernel.
> > What would be in your opinion the problem to use the monatvista kernel
> > with all the rest which is build with crosstool. What are potential
> > inconviences?
> Technically, the kernel and user space are very well decoupled. You
> can generally use a different toolchain for kernel and applications.
> For a simple system, this will probably work.
> Practically, you may run into problems with current user space
> utilities (like udev) requiring a recent kernel. When I have to work
> on a full featured system running the 2.4 kernel, it is generally a
> lot of pain. But, with simple systems you may be fine. My strategy
> is always to use the latest of everything if possible. If you run
> into problems, chances are there are people interested in helping you
> fix them.
Miroslaw Dach (Miroslaw.Dach@psi.ch) - SLS/Controls Group
PSI - Paul Scherrer Institut CH-5232 Villigen
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq
More information about the crossgcc