From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bernhard Fischer Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 15:07:03 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Target support for Atmel ARM/AVR32 In-Reply-To: <20070125134707.GA17985@aon.at> References: <20070125090434.GB15747@aon.at> <00bd01c7407f$a8c4c300$01c4af0a@atmel.com> <20070125134707.GA17985@aon.at> Message-ID: <20070125140703.GA18175@aon.at> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 02:47:07PM +0100, Bernhard Fischer wrote: >On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 01:42:20PM +0100, Ulf Samuelsson wrote: >>Bernhard Fischer wrote: > >>>If the TODO that is mentioned in r17516 would be fixed, would that >>>help that problem in any way? I, personally, don't use the concept of >>>a board in the context of buildroot. Put that aside, what about this >>>layout: >>>-) toolchain___ >>>-) same for build_ >>>-) board_ as default COPY_TO >>> >>>where >>>$device is target/device/* >>>$arch would be generic arch e.g. i386, arm >>>$subarch is the real -march= >>>$cpu is the real -mtune= >>> >>>Opinions? >> >>That is a different problem. >>I can either build an ARM based buildroot or an AVR32 based buildroot. >>They will build in: build_arm and build_avr32, same for toolchain. >> >>My problem is that I want to build for >>AT91RM9200DK -ARM920T >>AT91RM9200DF -ARM920T >>AT91RM9200EK -ARM920T >>AT91SAM9260EK -ARM926EJS >>AT91SAM9261EK -ARM926EJS >>AT91SAM9263EK -ARM926EJS >>AT91SAM9XEEK -ARM926EJS >>using a common toolchain >>(The toolchain is generic arm, even though I use different CPU cores) >>and maybe a common root file system (today it is). >> >>This means that >>* 7 different Linux versions, >>* 7 different U-boot >>* 7 different bootstraps. >>Possibly, the root file system should be populated differently. >> >>When I have built a board, I want to have all binaries stored >>in one place which can be easily compressed into a tarball. >> >>Your suggestion is more for building different toolchains for different >>boards >>but this is not the case. > >My suggestion is to build two toolchains (assuming that ARM920T != >ARM926EJS, if it is the same, then it's only one toolchain) and use that >to populate the board_{AT91*} dirs Just to clarify. If your subarch is nil -- i.e. generic $arch -- then you have only one toolchain in your abovementioned example. One toolchain, N board_AT91*/{bin,sbin,etc,...} See? >> >>It is a big bonus, If I do not have to recompile the root file system >>packages, just because I build support for a new board. > >What i wrote above did not suggest this.