From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from vms173019pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.19]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SH2rf-0007pw-UO for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2012 02:53:52 +0200 Received: from gandalf.denix.org ([unknown] [71.178.225.66]) by vms173019.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0M260003ASP3ARC0@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net> for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sun, 08 Apr 2012 19:44:06 -0500 (CDT) Received: by gandalf.denix.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 199E8201CF; Sun, 08 Apr 2012 20:43:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2012 20:43:50 -0400 From: Denys Dmytriyenko To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Message-id: <20120409004350.GA10246@denix.org> References: <4F80ACD6.8080901@gmail.com> MIME-version: 1.0 In-reply-to: <4F80ACD6.8080901@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Subject: Re: meta-linaro and toolchain-layer X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 00:53:52 -0000 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 02:08:38PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi, > > Ken Werner @ Linaro has created a meta-linaro layer. I have created a > github repo of same here https://github.com/kraj/meta-linaro FWIW, I've been closely monitoring the progress of meta-linaro layer for past month and its status as applicable to meta-ti: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/meta-ti/2012-March/000747.html When I tried it last time to build some of our machines in meta-ti, there were issues, but I didn't have time to follow up or investigate and I was busy with the BSP presentation at the time... As a parallel effort, I was looking into working on the prebuilt toolchain support - i.e. recipes to use binary Linaro toolchain in OE/Yocto. I grabbed the latest 2012.03 release before leaving for the BSP Summit and Linux Collab and will give it a try ASAP. > Moving forward soon gcc 4.7 will land in OE-Core and 4.6 will be > more or less retired. In natural progression it would move to > toolchain-layer if there are consumers of it. > > linaro is also working on gcc-4.7 improvements in same manner as > 4.6 and there could be more tools e.g. gdb binutils etc. that could > be useful for armv7+ from that layer. > > I would like to propose few things we could do. > > Use gcc-4.6 from meta-linaro and retire it from toolchain-layer > which means toolchain layer only has gcc-4.5 and eventually > This also means that we don't move gcc-4.6 into toolchain-layer > when its relegated from OE-Core > > In similar fashion add recipes for gcc-linaro-4.7 whenever linaro > makes first 4.7 based release > > Does anybody see downsides to this approach ? Sounds like a decent plan, but we need to validate the newest toolchain versions with the real hardware before making the switch and dropping the old versions - 4.5 is still the most stable build for me and the broad range of architectures and platforms I work with at TI from ARM9 to Cortex-A15... > This could mean that distro may have multiple compilers for different > architectures e.g. linaro toolchain for arm > architecture and may be OE-Core provided toolchain for rest of them > > another option is that we do the same thing where we cherry-pick > linaro patches into toolchain-layer and append them on top gcc from > OE-Core which we have been doing with 4.6 it does mean extra work > validation and maintenance that I would like to avoid. -- Denys