From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Edwards Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:08:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Buildroot] Still can't build working rootfs with crosstool-NG toolchain References: <20100419180637.241cbdd0@surf> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 2010-04-19, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 14:44:30 +0000 (UTC) > Grant Edwards wrote: > >> I've spend the past week trying to use crosstool-NG instead of >> buildroot to build a toolchain. I had been using external buildroot >> toolchains for the past couple months with no problems. But, that is >> unsupported by buildroot, and I'm giving up fighting that battle. > > Come on, it is *not* unsupported. We are trying to support it, but > facing issues. I just meant that it doesn't currently work unless I maintain forked versions of several .mk files (including ext-tool.mk). I don't want to do that anymore, so I'm trying to switch to ctNG and abandon my forked files. >> It doesn't seem to matter which toolchain I use to build the kernel, I >> get the same results with both kernels. I'm using an Atmel >> AT91SAM9G20EK development board, gcc 4.4.3, uClibc 0.9.30.2. > > The problem might be related to OABI vs. EABI. What's the > configuration of the toolchain, the Buildroot configuration, and the > kernel configuration for this ? Doh. It was indeed an OABI vs. EABI problem. The problem was a result of daisy-chaining several bits of my own stupidity together: 1) At one point I had switched the buildroot toolchain to EABI, but somehow I switched it back either without knowing or without remembering. 2) I had thought that using an EABI toolchain produced an EABI kernel, but it doesn't: there's a kernel configuration variable you have to set. This resulted in my mistaken belief that my kernel was EABI and my misinterpreting some testing that I did in an attempt to confirm that both toolchains were EABI. 3) I had a downloaded an EABI kernel uImage file to use for testing and didn't realize it had backwards OABI compatibility enabled -- causing me to stumble even further down the path of believing all my different kernels, root filesystems, and toolchains were EABI. It's all painfully obvious now... -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! ... My pants just went at on a wild rampage through a gmail.com Long Island Bowling Alley!!