This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See crosstool-NG 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] |
On Wednesday 26 September 2012 00:47:07 Esben Haabendal wrote: > Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> writes: > >> I will rework the patch to set CT_TARGET_KERNEL depending on both > >> CT_ARCH_USE_MMU and CT_ARCH. So "linux" for bfin and "uclinux" for > >> m68k. > > > > hard coding one way or the other is wrong. bfin-uclinux is valid, as is > > m68k- uclinux and arm-uclinux and mips-uclinux and many other targets. > > Well, the fact is that either GCC has to be changed to handle > linux/uclinux in the arch tuple to your preferences, or ct-ng has to be > able to handle it. The current situations makes ct-ng unable to build > linux-uclibc for m68k cpus without mmu. i don't know what the selection of ct-ng looks like as i don't use it. i'm just clarifying incorrect statements made and giving background. if you want to target m68k systems running Linux w/out an mmu using the FLAT format, then "m68k-uclinux" is the tuple you want to use. hardcoding any arch around that logic is wrong. -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |