[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[W.P.]

Hi,
how can I set up CURRENT buildroot to use OLD gcc/binutils/kernel/uClibc?
I need gcc 3.4.4, kernel 2.6.12.6-venus, uClibc 0.9.28?

W.P.

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "W" == W P <laurentp@wp.pl> writes:

 W> Hi,
 W> how can I set up CURRENT buildroot to use OLD gcc/binutils/kernel/uClibc?
 W> I need gcc 3.4.4, kernel 2.6.12.6-venus, uClibc 0.9.28?

Some older toolchain versions are available if you enable BR_DEPRECATED
(Build options->Show packages that are deprecated or obsolete). It won't
give you those exact options, but it might be close enough.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[W.P.]

U?ytkownik Peter Korsgaard napisa?:
>>>>>> "W" == W P <laurentp@wp.pl> writes:
>>>>>>             
>
>  W> Hi,
>  W> how can I set up CURRENT buildroot to use OLD gcc/binutils/kernel/uClibc?
>  W> I need gcc 3.4.4, kernel 2.6.12.6-venus, uClibc 0.9.28?
>
> Some older toolchain versions are available if you enable BR_DEPRECATED
> (Build options->Show packages that are deprecated or obsolete). It won't
> give you those exact options, but it might be close enough.
>
>   
Almost :(

With choosing this option I am able to select gcc down-to 3.4.6,
binutils 2.17, uClibc 0.9.28.3, kernel 2.6.2x ...

Could you point me to the file where are these choices are in? If I know
in what file, then adding an option ex. to gcc 3.4.4 instead of 3.4.6
should be easy...

W.P.

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[W.P.]

U?ytkownik Bernhard Reutner-Fischer napisa?:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:28:59PM +0200, W.P. wrote:
>   
>> U?ytkownik Peter Korsgaard napisa?:
>>     
>>>>>>>> "W" == W P <laurentp@wp.pl> writes:
>>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>  W> Hi,
>>>  W> how can I set up CURRENT buildroot to use OLD gcc/binutils/kernel/uClibc?
>>>  W> I need gcc 3.4.4, kernel 2.6.12.6-venus, uClibc 0.9.28?
>>>
>>> Some older toolchain versions are available if you enable BR_DEPRECATED
>>> (Build options->Show packages that are deprecated or obsolete). It won't
>>> give you those exact options, but it might be close enough.
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> Almost :(
>>
>> With choosing this option I am able to select gcc down-to 3.4.6,
>> binutils 2.17, uClibc 0.9.28.3, kernel 2.6.2x ...
>>
>> Could you point me to the file where are these choices are in? If I know
>> in what file, then adding an option ex. to gcc 3.4.4 instead of 3.4.6
>> should be easy...
>>     
>
> not really since you have to patch it.
> See toolchain/gcc/Config.in
>
> I'm curious why you think you need a compiler that is so full of
> bugs compared to let's say the current 4.x series?
>   

There is a system (Manta "Multimedia Recorder" HDD-2000 = Shenzen Mele
HMC-35HD) that was build using (i am almost sure after several hours of
googling) using those versions of tools. And binutils: 2.16 or even
2.15. I want to be able to build some kernel modules, so (correct me if
I am wrong) I need EXACT versions of tools/configure options to do so.

BTW It looks crazy, those Chinese/Taiwanese developpers (Mele, Edimax,
maybe others) seems to be TIED to gcc 3.4.4(3).....
(look at published Edimax toolchains for BR-6204Wg, BR-6104KP...)

BTW2: looks Manta(Poland) violates GPL.... : there is NO mention about
sources on their web.

W.P.

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[Bernhard Reutner-Fischer]

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:50:38AM +0200, W.P. wrote:

>There is a system (Manta "Multimedia Recorder" HDD-2000 = Shenzen Mele
>HMC-35HD) that was build using (i am almost sure after several hours of
>googling) using those versions of tools. And binutils: 2.16 or even
>2.15. I want to be able to build some kernel modules, so (correct me if
>I am wrong) I need EXACT versions of tools/configure options to do so.

for kernel modules it's a 80%-90% yes.
>
>BTW It looks crazy, those Chinese/Taiwanese developpers (Mele, Edimax,
>maybe others) seems to be TIED to gcc 3.4.4(3).....

It is. It's a pity that this way eventual (size)regressions don't get
fixed. I'f nevertheless try to build the module with 3.4.6 and see if
that works.

>(look at published Edimax toolchains for BR-6204Wg, BR-6104KP...)
>
>BTW2: looks Manta(Poland) violates GPL.... : there is NO mention about
>sources on their web.

I think there is a paragraph on the busybox page:
http://busybox.net/license.html#enforce

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[W.P.]

U?ytkownik Bernhard Reutner-Fischer napisa?:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:50:38AM +0200, W.P. wrote:
>
>   
>> There is a system (Manta "Multimedia Recorder" HDD-2000 = Shenzen Mele
>> HMC-35HD) that was build using (i am almost sure after several hours of
>> googling) using those versions of tools. And binutils: 2.16 or even
>> 2.15. I want to be able to build some kernel modules, so (correct me if
>> I am wrong) I need EXACT versions of tools/configure options to do so.
>>     
>
> for kernel modules it's a 80%-90% yes.
>   
>> BTW It looks crazy, those Chinese/Taiwanese developpers (Mele, Edimax,
>> maybe others) seems to be TIED to gcc 3.4.4(3).....
>>     
>
> It is. It's a pity that this way eventual (size)regressions don't get
> fixed. I'f nevertheless try to build the module with 3.4.6 and see if
> that works.
>
>   
>> (look at published Edimax toolchains for BR-6204Wg, BR-6104KP...)
>>
>> BTW2: looks Manta(Poland) violates GPL.... : there is NO mention about
>> sources on their web.
>>     
>
> I think there is a paragraph on the busybox page:
> http://busybox.net/license.html#enforce
>   
Somewhere on the net i've seen sentence about "not being too fast" ->
i'll try to look in a store what EXACTLY comes with that Manta.
At least they agree on their forum that it is Linux based.


Heeelllp. Where may I find buildroot-0.9.28(29)? I mean later than
0.9.27 and earlier than 2009.09.

Why am I asking: in buildroot 0.9.27 I have found patches for gcc 3.4.3
and I need 3.4.4 (google at linux-2.6.12.6-venus to see why).
And in 2009.02 earliest version of patches for gcc is 3.4.6. So there is
a "gap" between files available on buildroot download site.

For binutils i need version 2.15.94 which i may find in 0.9.27.

The rest (if I understand well the build process) is relatively simple:
patching config.in with versions i need?

W.P.

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "W" == W P <laurentp@wp.pl> writes:


 W> Heeelllp. Where may I find buildroot-0.9.28(29)? I mean later than
 W> 0.9.27 and earlier than 2009.09.

I take it you mean 2009.02. There is no such thing, there were no
releases between 0.9.27 in 2005 and 2009.02.

 W> Why am I asking: in buildroot 0.9.27 I have found patches for gcc 3.4.3
 W> and I need 3.4.4 (google at linux-2.6.12.6-venus to see why).
 W> And in 2009.02 earliest version of patches for gcc is 3.4.6. So there is
 W> a "gap" between files available on buildroot download site.

3.4.6 patches most likely apply to 3.4.4.

 W> For binutils i need version 2.15.94 which i may find in 0.9.27.

 W> The rest (if I understand well the build process) is relatively simple:
 W> patching config.in with versions i need?

yes.

Have you tried the oldest versions supported by 2009.02 before you do
all this work? Chances are that they'll work.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[W.P.]

U?ytkownik Peter Korsgaard napisa?:
>>>>>> "W" == W P <laurentp@wp.pl> writes:
>>>>>>             
>
>
>  W> Heeelllp. Where may I find buildroot-0.9.28(29)? I mean later than
>  W> 0.9.27 and earlier than 2009.09.
>
>   
I take it you mean 2009.02. There is no such thing, there were no

Yes, 2009-02.
> releases between 0.9.27 in 2005 and 2009.02.
>
>  W> Why am I asking: in buildroot 0.9.27 I have found patches for gcc 3.4.3
>  W> and I need 3.4.4 (google at linux-2.6.12.6-venus to see why).
>  W> And in 2009.02 earliest version of patches for gcc is 3.4.6. So there is
>  W> a "gap" between files available on buildroot download site.
>
> 3.4.6 patches most likely apply to 3.4.4.
>
>   
OK, i'll try to copy them for 3.4.4.
>  W> For binutils i need version 2.15.94 which i may find in 0.9.27.
>
>  W> The rest (if I understand well the build process) is relatively simple:
>  W> patching config.in with versions i need?
>
> yes.
>
> Have you tried the oldest versions supported by 2009.02 before you do
> all this work? Chances are that they'll work.
>
>   
No, I didn't. But for binutils 2.15.94.0.2.2 patch directory is empty in
2009-02, and there are patches in 0.9.27 in 2.15.94.0.2 dir.

Will try and report results.

W.P.

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[W.P.]

U?ytkownik W.P. napisa?:
> U?ytkownik Peter Korsgaard napisa?:
>   
>>>>>>> "W" == W P <laurentp@wp.pl> writes:
>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>               
>>  W> Heeelllp. Where may I find buildroot-0.9.28(29)? I mean later than
>>  W> 0.9.27 and earlier than 2009.09.
>>
>>   
>>     
> I take it you mean 2009.02. There is no such thing, there were no
>
> Yes, 2009-02.
>   
>> releases between 0.9.27 in 2005 and 2009.02.
>>
>>  W> Why am I asking: in buildroot 0.9.27 I have found patches for gcc 3.4.3
>>  W> and I need 3.4.4 (google at linux-2.6.12.6-venus to see why).
>>  W> And in 2009.02 earliest version of patches for gcc is 3.4.6. So there is
>>  W> a "gap" between files available on buildroot download site.
>>
>> 3.4.6 patches most likely apply to 3.4.4.
>>
>>   
>>     
> OK, i'll try to copy them for 3.4.4.
>   
>>  W> For binutils i need version 2.15.94 which i may find in 0.9.27.
>>
>>  W> The rest (if I understand well the build process) is relatively simple:
>>  W> patching config.in with versions i need?
>>
>> yes.
>>
>> Have you tried the oldest versions supported by 2009.02 before you do
>> all this work? Chances are that they'll work.
>>
>>   
>>     
> No, I didn't. But for binutils 2.15.94.0.2.2 patch directory is empty in
> 2009-02, and there are patches in 0.9.27 in 2.15.94.0.2 dir.
>
> Will try and report results.
>   
Made "patches" for Config.in for kernel headers, gcc and binutils. No
software packages/kernel selected, just toolchain.

First error (download generic 2.6.12.6 kernel OK, and then error):

[root at laurent-home buildroot]# make

Checking build system dependencies:
BUILDROOT_DL_DIR clean:                         Ok
CC clean:                                       Ok
CXX clean:                                      Ok
CPP clean:                                      Ok
CFLAGS clean:                                   Ok
INCLUDES clean:                                 Ok
CXXFLAGS clean:                                 Ok
which installed:                                Ok
sed works:                                      Ok (/bin/sed)
GNU make version '3.81':                        Ok
C compiler '/usr/bin/gcc'
C compiler version '4.1.2':                     Ok
C++ compiler '/usr/bin/g++'
C++ compiler version '4.1.2':                   Ok
awk installed:                                  Ok
bash installed:                                 Ok
bison installed:                                Ok
flex installed:                                 Ok
gettext installed:                              Ok
makeinfo installed:                             Ok
Build system dependencies:                      Ok

rm -rf /usr/src/buildroot/project_build_mipsel/uclibc/buildroot-config
mkdir -p /usr/src/buildroot/project_build_mipsel/uclibc
cp -dpRf package/config/buildroot-config
/usr/src/buildroot/project_build_mipsel/uclibc/buildroot-config
(cd /usr/src/buildroot/toolchain_build_mipsel/linux-2.6.12.6; \
         /usr/bin/make -j1 ARCH=mips \
                HOSTCC="/usr/bin/gcc" HOSTCFLAGS="" \
                HOSTCXX="/usr/bin/g++" \
               
INSTALL_HDR_PATH=/usr/src/buildroot/toolchain_build_mipsel/linux
headers_install; \
        )
make[1]: Entering directory
`/usr/src/buildroot/toolchain_build_mipsel/linux-2.6.12.6'
Makefile:485: .config: No such file or directory
make[1]: *** No rule to make target `headers_install'.  Stop.
make[1]: Leaving directory
`/usr/src/buildroot/toolchain_build_mipsel/linux-2.6.12.6'
make: *** [/usr/src/buildroot/toolchain_build_mipsel/linux/.configured]
Error 2
[root at laurent-home buildroot]#

What should I do?

W.P.

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[W.P.]

U?ytkownik Gammalsvenska napisa?:
>>> No, I didn't. But for binutils 2.15.94.0.2.2 patch directory is
>>> empty in
>>> 2009-02, and there are patches in 0.9.27 in 2.15.94.0.2 dir.
>>>
>>> Will try and report results.
>>>   
>> Made "patches" for Config.in for kernel headers, gcc and binutils. No
>> software packages/kernel selected, just toolchain.
>>
>> First error (download generic 2.6.12.6 kernel OK, and then error):
> > [...]
>> `/usr/src/buildroot/toolchain_build_mipsel/linux-2.6.12.6'
>> Makefile:485: .config: No such file or directory
>> make[1]: *** No rule to make target `headers_install'.  Stop.
>> make[1]: Leaving directory
>> `/usr/src/buildroot/toolchain_build_mipsel/linux-2.6.12.6'
>> make: *** [/usr/src/buildroot/toolchain_build_mipsel/linux/.configured]
>> Error 2
>> [root at laurent-home buildroot]#
>>
>> What should I do?
>
>
> You can always use an older version of buildroot.
> There are no releases earlier than 2009.05, but it was maintained back
> then. Snapshots were done in subversion (nowadays they use git) and
> you can always use an older version from there.
>
> Try to find out which releases are appropriate for you. Manually
> patching is probably not working too well as in recent releases old
> versions have been removed including workarounds needed.
>
Sorry, don't understand. I need to make cross-compile environement with
following "parameters":

gcc: 3.4.4
binutils 2.15.94
kernel 2.6.12.6-venus
uClibc 0.9.28
busybox 1.1.3

and i am trying to do this with buildroot. could you help?

W.P.

> Best regards,
> Sebastian

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[Sebastian]

Hello,

>> You can always use an older version of buildroot.
>> [...]
>>
> Sorry, don't understand. I need to make cross-compile environement with
> following "parameters":
> 
> gcc: 3.4.4
> binutils 2.15.94
> kernel 2.6.12.6-venus
> uClibc 0.9.28
> busybox 1.1.3
> 
> and i am trying to do this with buildroot. could you help?

Do the following:

$ git clone git://git.buildroot.net/buildroot
$ cd buildroot/
$ git reset --hard gcc3_legacy
$ make menuconfig

Make sure to activate
"Build options" --> "Show packages that are deprecated or obsolete"

Now you have a version which allows you to use:

gcc 3.4.4
binutils 2.15 or 2.15.94.0.2.2
kernel 2.6.12
uClibc 0.9.28
busybox 1.1.3

You probably can't get closer to your wished versions (easily).

I don't know what your "-venus" kernel means, but if you want to build a 
kernel module without the _exact_ sources you will probably be out of luck.

Make sure you tell us if it works! :-)

I do not know how to operate git, and I could not find any reference to 
the old SVN repository (if it still exists...), so you may be better off 
asking someone else.

I hope I could help,

Best regards,
Sebastian

[Buildroot] setting up buildroot for using OLD gcc / binutils

[W.P.]

U?ytkownik Sebastian napisa?:
> Hello,
>
>>> You can always use an older version of buildroot.
>>> [...]
>>>
>> Sorry, don't understand. I need to make cross-compile environement with
>> following "parameters":
>>
>> gcc: 3.4.4
>> binutils 2.15.94
>> kernel 2.6.12.6-venus
>> uClibc 0.9.28
>> busybox 1.1.3
>>
>> and i am trying to do this with buildroot. could you help?
>
> Do the following:
>
> $ git clone git://git.buildroot.net/buildroot
> $ cd buildroot/
> $ git reset --hard gcc3_legacy
> $ make menuconfig
>
> Make sure to activate
> "Build options" --> "Show packages that are deprecated or obsolete"
>
> Now you have a version which allows you to use:
>
> gcc 3.4.4
> binutils 2.15 or 2.15.94.0.2.2
> kernel 2.6.12
> uClibc 0.9.28
> busybox 1.1.3
>
> You probably can't get closer to your wished versions (easily).
>
> I don't know what your "-venus" kernel means, but if you want to build
> a kernel module without the _exact_ sources you will probably be out
> of luck.
>
> Make sure you tell us if it works! :-)
>
> I do not know how to operate git, and I could not find any reference
> to the old SVN repository (if it still exists...), so you may be
> better off asking someone else.
>
> I hope I could help,

Great thanks, at least things started to build.

But I got uClibc bigger than on real system. This may be because of
options selected by default. (at least what is WRONG in uClibc.config is
TARGET_ARCH=none, KERNEL_SOURCE=/usr/src/linux,
KERNEL_HEADERS=/usr/src/linux/include -> this points to my i386 kernel
files).

So my question for now is how do I selectively "make clean uClibc"? As I
want to "play" with uClibc options.

And second one: how to prevent "make clean" from erasing downloads?

W.P.