This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Dan Kegel wrote:How about posting a patch to fix the kernel sources, now that you've found the problem?
but, again, is this really the direction you want to take?
Think about it... are toolchains the only thing I build?
it could conceivably require one patch per architecture, whereas the sanitized headers seem like such a simpler and safer solution. and patching the kernel source might not be a one-time thing as some future feature might screw up the build process yet again. why take the chance?
Because I want to build the kernel, perhaps?
I'm proposing that you really fix the kernel Makefile, for real, and submit the patch, for real.
Though the patch is to the kernel, it is dependent upon the GCC version used to build the kernel. So it seems that the patch should go into patches/gcc-4.0.x and be applied to linux-2.6.x. Will that work? Or will crosstool attempt to apply the patch to GCC if the kernel patch is in the gcc-4.0.x directory?
-- Michael N. Moran (h) 770 516 7918 5009 Old Field Ct. (c) 678 521 5460 Kennesaw, GA, USA 30144 http://mnmoran.org
"So often times it happens, that we live our lives in chains and we never even know we have the key." The Eagles, "Already Gone"
------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |