Re: toolchain requirements submission

[Wouter van Heyst <wouter at vidicode dot org>]

On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 09:57:50AM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> 
> Dan Kegel wrote:
> >Greg Ungerer wrote:
> >>Something that I like in my ARM toolachains is to support both big and
> >>little endian target generation from the one installation set. I mean
> >>with full glibc for both. I don't see many other people talk about this,
> >>is this not something others do or need?  On a daily basis I build for 
> >>both big and little endian ARM platforms, and I really don't want tow
> >>full arm-linux toolchains installed.

Two people so far have mentioned they want big endian support, the rest
does not seem to care. At least one of them did not object to two
seperate toolchains, but taking your points below into account, it isn't
the best idea. I personally stopped working with big-endian ixdp425 and
just do little-endian nowadays.


If there are more people who needs big-endian, _please_ speak up. This
goes for the rest too, the amount of requirements posted are in sharp
contrast with the number of toolchain-help related postings in the
previous months. If someone has already posted what you need, don't let
that stop you, this is about getting a good overview of what everyone
needs, and statistics come into play there.

<slightly disappointed rant/>


<snip>

> >(For the moment, I'm unlikely to do that work myself, since my priority
> >is to get more architectures supported and to get crosstool to the
> >point where glibc developers can use it to verify that proposed
> >patches don't break the build of other architectures.
> >And the workaround, of having multiple toolchains installed, isn't
> >*that* painful given how large hard disks are these days.)
> 
> This gets out of control very quickly once you start to look at
> a couple of different multilib setups. I need a setup now that
> lets me generate big/little endian and both hard/soft float. That
> would mean 4 separate tool chains for all combinations.
> 
> The arm-elf I use for uClinux also does big/little endian and
> pic/non-pic. I really need it to do hard/soft float as well.
> So 6 combinations.

Mulitlibbing has my preference, precisely because of this reason.

> I currently have 6 different CPU architecture compilers installed
> and in regular use on my dev system. As you can see, separate
> compilers for each combination would get silly very quickly.
> 
> The gcc multilib support is good. It is the building of glibc
> (or uClibc) for the combinations where I usually have to fix
> things up.

For gcc, uncommenting MULTILIB_OPTIONS and friends in
gcc/config/arm/t-arm-elf should get one going in my experience.
I don't know yet how to do that for glibc tho, do you have a list of
common problems you run in to, or even a solution that always works?

Wouter van Heyst

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com