From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 3643AE00823; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 06:43:59 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (peteasa[at]gmail.com) * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low * trust * [209.85.212.179 listed in list.dnswl.org] Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com (mail-wi0-f179.google.com [209.85.212.179]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B44AE003E3 for ; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 06:43:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wi0-f179.google.com with SMTP id ex7so4354256wid.12 for ; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 06:43:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lN/02yDhFsRlj49N/rIVTWKPnyEVx6ooIT4diKHgCIQ=; b=C0W+5HPw7pu2BQtIkwOV9jCaGWQoJDUq5drZWCg+M3en6YANJ12q52LbUFuHy8jXdj ohzaHMAOsU8xRP2D59NjWd9476FIrZEJdNch1ezvEYwdtOUqbOjmFxbIUQFUo6Fi5r+5 YnZLH0EkinScxTluffYXpq2LoYXQg9uWIX6889D3xLXfYejw2B7L3Lk7DCgaXadzU3jP XP6RN5GQe8n3JqFg+rqFelp9k7gIXnZjskEXaEL0fAln36T6G6FLXnkpwCo7EwniTsL2 aUhc7zUG2uZ0m6yaZck54TQB071LG8tP9k1sIUQrg3w/C3tDdvK6+bkrYdQuTTXOn1et OwHw== X-Received: by 10.180.38.98 with SMTP id f2mr14957992wik.55.1419086632235; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 06:43:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.169.0.118] (cpc18-heme10-2-0-cust113.9-1.cable.virginm.net. [81.96.152.114]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id e7sm16555370wjf.18.2014.12.20.06.43.50 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 20 Dec 2014 06:43:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54958B25.8080505@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 14:43:49 +0000 From: Peter Saunderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: Cross compiler which runs on the target architecture. X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 14:43:59 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I have seen a brief IRC chat (https://www.yoctoproject.org/irc/%23yocto.2013-09-23.log.html talking about https://github.com/nathanrossi/meta-parallella) about this question but nothing much else so this is an attempt to get more public feedback on this request. I am trying to build a cross compiler that runs on the target processor and a cross compiler that runs on the host processor so that I can build code for a third processor (Epiphany). If you want examples of the traditional way to build this compiler look at https://github.com/adapteva/epiphany-sdk epiphany-gcc epiphany-newlib epiphany-binutils... The end result would be a set of recipes that run on a pc build machine that build both arm code for the interim target and epiphany code for the final target and provides an SDK for the pc that enables you to cross compile for both arm and epiphany. As I am just starting to look at this I would like to know what size of task I am up against! My initial efforts based on review of poky/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils etc seem to suggest that I have to modify at least ${HOST_PREFIX}, ${TARGET_PREFIX}, ${TARGET_ARCH} etc for my epiphany-??? recipes so that the I can install the compiler in a suitable location with a suitable prefix, the IRC chat indicates that there are more things to consider also. The question I have is about how easy it will be to use existing recipes for existing compiler / binutils etc... or is this likely to end up as a completely new set of recipes from the ground up because the existing recipes cant cope with building cross / cross compilers where there are three processors to consider (host (intel based pc), interim target (arm) and final target (epiphany)), or at least a lot of changes in the existing recipes to cope with something like TARGET_TARGET_ARCH = ${TARGET_ARCH}_${FINAL_TARGET_ARCH}?? Thanks in advance for any comments. Peter.