Strategy for packaging an ARM Cortex-M toolchain
rc040203 at freenet.de
Sat May 26 03:27:27 UTC 2012
On 05/25/2012 10:45 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> 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.
This is simply not true. A gcc targeting glibc/linux is entirely
different from a GCC targetting newlib and entirely different from a GCC
targetting another OS.
More information about the devel