Strategy for packaging an ARM Cortex-M toolchain

Brendan Conoboy blc at
Fri May 25 20:45:25 UTC 2012

On 05/25/2012 12:10 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
>> I recomment to implement 2 separate toolchains with separate packages.
> Well, maybe that's true in the interest of expediency, but it's hardly
> an optimal solution. Would it at least be possible to list reasons why
> binutils have to be different, with the hope that they would be reduced
> over time, allowing eventual merging of the toolchains?

Why have more than one gcc or binutils for arm-eabi at all? Just add 
multilibs for the extra variants of interest.  You can even split the 
multilibs out into subpackages if it matters.

Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / blc at

More information about the devel mailing list