From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 14:44:22 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] Custom C Libraries for RISC-V 32-bit Support In-Reply-To: <20181003114145.bla23tjlwaqc5glu@sapphire.tkos.co.il> References: <37c3dc75-0145-ce92-05c0-6c9559b86022@embecosm.com> <20181003104024.ijzjzu6t4sp7cee3@sapphire.tkos.co.il> <20181003114145.bla23tjlwaqc5glu@sapphire.tkos.co.il> Message-ID: <20181003144422.2f2dc17b@windsurf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 14:41:45 +0300, Baruch Siach wrote: > The kernel way is definitely not the way to go. The kernel and U-Boot are > special because people tend to use per target source trees. I think that > something like what ARC is doing would be easier. A patch set might be > problematic because we'll need to forward port the patches whenever we bump > glibc version. I agree with Baruch, I'd prefer to see something similar to what we do for glibc on ARC, i.e the musl/glibc package automatically chose a different repo/version when building for RISC-V 32 (glibc) or RISC-V 32/64 (musl). Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com