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 Schwebel <robert@schwebel.de> wrote: > Steven, > > On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 10:16:05AM +0100, Steven Newbury wrote: > > > On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 08:42:24AM +0200, Robert Schwebel wrote: > > > > I've tried your patch on a debian unstable machine with gcc-4.0.3, > > > > 2.16.1cvs20060117-1 and glibc-2.3.6-7 and get this error from the > > > > glibc startfiles stage: > > > > You probably would be better off with gcc-4.1.0/glibc-2.4. The EABI > > merge caused a lot of flux through 4.0.x and has only stablised in > > 4.1.x. > > The problem is that for our PTXdist users (PTXdist uses crosstool > internally) normal people, using normal distributions, should be able to > build a cross toolchain, which means that we are more or less fixed to > what the distributions have these days. And that's what even Debian > Unstable currently has. > > But if it doesn't work, it doesn't work :-) I've not tried non-EABI NPTL, going EABI will of course break everything.. ;-) Maybe somebody here has..? Debian is working on an ARM EABI/NPTL distribution I don't know if that's much help to you though? > > > > Update: this seems to happen when you change the -mcpu thing from the > > > arm926 to strongarm. Does that mean that for certain ARM sub archs there > > > is something missing in binutils? > > > > It is quite possible. Are you using an actual StrongARM? > > No, we mainly use PXA255, PXA270, h720x, i.MX, netX and NetSilicon CPUs. > The thing is that, for a generic ARM softfloat toolchain, it should be > generic. And setting the cpu to strongarm gave us toolchains which > worked on all these architectures. If you want to continue targetting strongarm you may have to tweak binutils a little. I'll take a look if I get a moment. StrongARM is the closest common architecture for them all then? You maybe best to just build a completely generic ARM toolchain with mutlilib and use multiple spec files? Steve Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |