From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:49:23 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Blackfin Buildroot toolchain issue In-Reply-To: <55082FFD.30305@zacarias.com.ar> References: <20150315221722.3645eb35@free-electrons.com> <55082FFD.30305@zacarias.com.ar> Message-ID: <20150317144923.7e9b7fbb@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Gustavo Zacarias, On Tue, 17 Mar 2015 10:45:33 -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote: > I'll take a look, but my efforts regarding the blackfin toolchain were a > "best effort" scenario - just getting the toolchain to build where it > didn't before. > I have no hardware to test anything so even if it builds it might not > work correctly at all. Sure. So we need to decide whether it's worth support Blackfin in the internal toolchain backend at all. > In the mean time i've sent a patch to switch blackfin's default to an > external (ADI) toolchain. Great. But I've recently added a Buildroot-generated Blackfin external toolchain in the autobuilder toolchain configurations, so we need to decide if we want to support that or not. >From my point of view, since Blackfin already requires a very specific combination of compiler + binutils version, it's a bit of a dead end in terms of internal toolchain support, so we could just as well get rid of it entirely. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com