Andrew Haley wrote:
Hans de Goede writes:
> Andy Green wrote:
> > Hans de Goede wrote:
> >
> >> You don't get my objectino, I'm crossing from Fedora but not too Fedora,
> >> therefore what is in Fedora's specfile is completely irrelevant. Extreme
> >> example, the sdcc cross-compiler already in Fedora. This crosses from
> >> Fedora to 8051 (and other) microcontrollers. It uses its own assembler
> >> and is its own C-compiler, binutils and gcc are not used at all (except
> >> for building the asm / compiler themselves, duh). Should the sdcc
> >> specfile be a pathc on top of gcc's specfile, a patch effectively
> >> replacing 100% of it, just because its a c-compiler too?
> >
> > Should Fedora packages have to deal with it at all "just because its a
> > c-compiler too?" I think the scenario of striving to be able to build
> > glibc for 8051 on sdcc needs to be triaged into a different discussion.
> >
>
> I'm not talking about building glibc for 8051 (that would be kinda hard as an
> average 8051 comes with 256 bytes of ram, and no I didn't forget an K or M there).
No, that's the 8052, the de luxe version. The 8051 has 128 bytes of RAM...
I know, but actually most 8051 deratives are 8052's hence I wrote "average"
Regards,
Hans
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
