From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:37:10 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Buildroot for avr32 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20121129113710.63d5676c@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear David Collier, On Thu, 29 Nov 2012 10:20 +0000 (GMT Standard Time), David Collier wrote: > Hi - we have a design based on the AVR32. Aaah great! > Historically Atmel provided a "special-buildroot-for-AVR32". Trouble is > their only AVR32 that ran Linux is now end-of-life, and I'm not sure they > have any interest. > > The last version of it I can find is based on a buildroot that is 2 years > out of date. > > So the question is - should I be able to use "standard buildroot" with an > AVR32 - or was Atmel adding some magic of their own that has not been > back-ported to the main trunk? Good to see someone using AVR32. We've been wondering what to do with our AVR32 support, because not many people have been using it. Normally, we have a working AVR32 setup, with certainly old versions of uClibc, binutils and gdb. I was told by AVR32 people that upgrading to uClibc 0.9.33 should work, but there are a few missing system calls in the AVR32 upstream kernel. If you are interested, we can look at this together, as I lack AVR32 hardware to dive into this. So, I would definitely be interested if you could try out the mainline Buildroot, and report what the problems are (if any), and we'll see how to move from here. Of course, if you are aware of the availability for AVR32 of a more recent gcc than the 4.2.x we're using and a more recent binutils than the 2.18 we're using, we're interested as well. Thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com