Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 10:04:03AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
As for bochs you are very welcome to take over maintainership of that I
never use it, just say the word and I'll release it in pkgdb.
I'll mull it over. I don't use it much myself tbh, but it's the kind of
thing I'm interested in in general so wouldn't mind. Will let you know.
I have a set of Fedora -> Fedora cross toolchains, built for ARM (one
toolchain targeting Fedora/ARM glibc, and one targeting ARM/uClibc), but
it can also build x86 -> ia64 cross toolchains for example:
http://ftp.linux.org.uk/pub/linux/arm/fedora/cross/latest/
Wiki page detailing the ARM side of it:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/CrossToolchain
Nice,
I would like to give this a try to see if it can replace the upper (glibc,
binutils, gcc) part of the arm-gp2x-linux chain.
The current normal way to build gp2x binaries is to statically link them as
the glibc included in the gp2x firmware is ancient.
This thus only leaves the kernel as a potential problem, which on the gp2x
is ancient too: 2.4.25, yes you've read that correct, no typos 2.4.25, so
will the glibc that is used for Fedora-arm support this kernel?
If you build it old-ABI, it probably will. But note that the
Fedora/ARM port itself is built entirely EABI, which needs at least
a 2.6.12-ish kernel to run -- so it'll be hard to run binary packages
built for Fedora/ARM on your gp2x device.
Would it be possible to add support for this kernel to the Fedora-arm glibc?
If you build old-ABI, it shouldn't need anything special.
Would the person responsible for glibc on Fedora arm be willing to enable
support for this kernel?
As I said above, if your board runs an old-ABI userland, it is unlikely
that you'll be able to run Fedora/ARM binaries on it.
IOW, the precompiled binaries offered at the
http://ftp.linux.org.uk/pub/linux/arm/fedora/cross/latest/
repo are not usable for the gp2x, and since making them usable requires using a
different ABI the default Fedora glibc will never be usable on the gp2x, unless
someone updates the kernel. Correct?
In that case I think its best to stick with a seperate toolchain for the gp2x
Regards,
Hans
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
