From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 23:44:43 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] Antw:Re: Antw: Antw:Re: libgcc build fails on Fedora15 In-Reply-To: <7290fd86f3ac9.4e80ae6d@home.nl> References: <7290fd86f3ac9.4e80ae6d@home.nl> Message-ID: <20110927234443.433e13a1@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello Marcel, Le Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:55:09 +0200, "MARCEL JANSSEN" a ?crit : > Thanks for your comment. I indeed still use OABI, but I have no > reason to stay with that. So, to make things easier I will switch to > EABI and see what will happen. It compiles well, I just need to check > it on a real device, which probably is not issue as well. That > doesn't mean that I'm not interested in a reply to my initial > question regarding the invalid ABI and why fedora 15 triggers this > error and fedora 14 does not. I guess some people will be looking for > the same answer on the net, so if anyone knows what's the real cause > it is still interesting to mention it I think. I have no idea why OABI breaks on Fedora 15 and I'm personally not really interested in fixing this, as support for OABI really isn't a priority. Of course, interested parties are welcome to investigate the problem and provide the corresponding fixes. > Maybe its' nice to add "deprecated" to OABI ? > Or perhaps, not even allow it any more if there's no real reason to > chose it. It might be needed for people having legacy binaries. > I also decided to switch to the new buildroot immediately. It's so > much better than the old one I was using and really appreciate all > the efforts of the team. The time to port from my old buildroot to > the new one took about 1 day and so far things seem to be ok. So far > I'm very impressed by the new buildroot and I'm sure I will use it a > lot ( and contribute as well when I can). Thanks! Buildroot has indeed improved quite a lot during the last 2/3 years. > I just have one question which probably belongs in the faq (I may > have missed something as well). I can't yet figure out how to build > the output for different devices without recompiling the whole > toolchain. I have several different images which are just a little > different in the sense that they all have the same kernel but some > different packages. It would be great if I could just switch between > configs and don't have to recompile the whole toolchain again or even > shared packages between those configs. Buildroot is very simple: one configuration, one build. No way to share things across different builds. Adding the ability of sharing build results across various builds complicates things a lot, and Buildroot would lose one of its core advantage: simplicity. Since the toolchain build typically accounts for a large part of the overall build time, what we generally recommend in this kind of situation is to make use of the external toolchain mechanism. The principle is : 1/ Generate a toolchain with Crosstool-NG, Buildroot or use a pre-compiled toolchain such as CodeSourcery ones. 2/ Tell Buildroot to use this toolchain as an external toolchain. Buildroot will "import" this toolchain in just a few seconds, will skip the toolchain building process and start right away with the build process of the packages. That's the mechanism I use for all my Buildroot-based projects. I almost never use the internal Buildroot mechanism to build a toolchain. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com