On Sat, 2007-02-24 at 20:09 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >>> This is why I plea for a cross-compiler SIG, so far I know of the > >>> following people being interested: > >>> > >>> Hans de Goede (avr-gcc, arm-linux-gp2x-gcc) > >>> Kevin Kofler (tigcc) > >>> Ralf Corsepius (rtems) > > .. freebsd, cygwin, mingw ... > > > > So does this mean we can count you in? (I think we can, but you never > explicitly said yes). For the moment, yes. But given the feedback, toolchains I had submitted for FE more than a year ago had received, my expectations hardly could be lower. > >>> Welcome aboard, notice that I've got a couple of last-year CS students > >>> working on packaging avr-gcc, so please contact me before things get > >>> done twice. > > > > Do me a favor, don't name cross tools "cpu", use a more specific name, > > such as avr-elf. "avr" is too unspecific to specify a particular > > toolchain, which, gnerally speaking, will always consists of more than > > just a "target" compiler. > > > > The avr is a 8 bit OS less mcu, the avr-gcc chain generates code to run > directly on the bare hardware. There is no "executuble" format, elf > no OS, avr-libc > no nothing. elf/avr-libc alone cause this toolchain to contain hardcoded characteristics, which make it unusable for other avr-targets environments (e.g. avr-rtems uses newlib instead of avr-libc). > Also notice that every makefile for AVR software under the > sun (that I know of) refers to avr-gcc as avr-gcc and nothing else. Sorry, to me these packages are simply bugged. > Thus for exact the same reasons why we want > /usr/<target>/{bin,lib,include} and not seperate <target> dirs under bin > lib include, we want avr-gcc to be just plain avr-gcc. This is a common fault, "bare" target toolchain implementors tend to commit. They think a "cpu" is sufficient to describe a target-toolchains characteristic. They miss that "cpu" alone means nothing and will break when something changes, e.g. the object format, or the libc they are using. E.g. "i386" means nothing, a i386-pc-coff toolchains is something completely different than a today's i386-pc-linux toolchain (currently implies i386/glibc2/elf.), a i386-cygwin toolchain, a i386-mingw toolchain, i386-rtems or a "bare/freestanding i386" toolchain. Ralf -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list