thoughts on crosstool enhancements

["Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday at mindspring dot com>]

  thinking out loud here:

1) how about removing the buildlogs from the basic tarball, and making
that a separate download if people need it?  those buildlogs represent
the vast majority of the crosstool tarball, and it's not clear that
every person downloading crosstool is going to ever look at those
logs.

2) how about removing support for some of the older and superseded
versions of software and getting rid of some of those patch
directories?

in some cases, it's clear you need to keep older versions of some
software.  but, as an example, does crosstool really need to supply
patches and support all of gcc 3.4.0, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3 *and* 3.4.4?

at some point, wouldn't it be easier to reduce the number of versions
to support and just tell people that, if they're using 3.4.3, they
might as well upgrade to 3.4.4?  or something like that.

(as another example, how many different versions of binutils really
need to be supported?)

3) how about extending crosstool to support multiple patch
directories?  this makes it really easy to add local patches for newer
software without cluttering up the crosstool patches/ directory
itself.  i use that technique for my mini script and it makes life a
lot easier.

rday

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