thx -----邮件原件----- 发件人: Matthias Klose [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 发送时间: 2007年3月26日 18:09 收件人: Wookey 抄送: Embedded Debian 主题: Re: Fwd: Status of gcc-4.0
Wookey writes: > [continuing this discussion on-list] > > On 2007-03-25 09:30 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > > Hector Oron writes: > > > Hello Matthias, > > > > > > We are doing an effort to maintain a cross toolchain in sync with > > > debian one at www.emdebian.org. > > > > cool, maybe we should have met at Fosdem, but I was all the time in > > the java sessions. > > > > > I remember to read somewhere that gcc-4.0 was going to pass away for > > > most of the Debian arches. > > > Could you, please, tell us where to read or what are the plans for > > > gcc-4.0 toolchain? > > > > well, 4.0 will be part of etch, but as you say, just used on hppa. I'm > > unsure if you do want to base your work on 4.0. 4.1.2 from > > experimental might be a better idea. If you want to target lenny, > > maybe go ahead with 4.2. > > We do our best to support all the versions of gcc that are available in > each debian suite. But this does depend on cross-build tools building and > actually producing valid code. > > > When disabling binary packages for the native builds, I may break the > > cross targets unintentionally. It's somewhat important that you > > regularily check gcc & binutils versions from experimental for such > > things (at the moment the build of libgcc1 and libstdc++6 from the 4.1 > > in experimental is disabled, didn't check for the cross build). > > OK. We are currently only building unstable tools and letting them > percolate down into testing and stable. There is no reason why we > shouldn't include experimental in this process, so we will try and do > so. this is just for times, when experimental is ahead of unstable. > > btw, please see that gcc-4.1-source, gcc-4.2-source and > > binutils-source are now in the archive, so it should be easy to build > > cross packages just by build-depending on these packages. > > Hmm. Building from the toolchain-source package was deprecated a > couple of years back, for good reasons, IMHO, so we build from the > standard source packages (e.g gcc-4.1). I'm not sure what would be > gained by build-dep-ing on the above binary-namespace source packages? > > Apologies if I am missing something obvious here. the toolchain-source package had a *copy* of all the required sources. in the current gcc-4.1-source you'll find exactly the source from the gcc-4.1 source package, plus any patches that are applied. something what might be needed are rebuilds of the cross packages when the subminor compiler version changes. > > Let me know, > > what else is needed as "source package" (newlib, glibc?) > > Well currently only binutils and gcc are built from source. Libraries > are just downloaded and convered for cross-building with dpkg-cross. > But for new arches glibc needs to be built from source (and maybe > uclibc one day). > > But this refers back to the above question of how these binary > source-packages help. Currently the cross-builds can not be done by the > normal build system because that doesn't know about the jiggery-pokery > needed for cross-building (see > http://buildd.emdebian.org/svn/browser/current/emdebian/trunk/buildcross/tru nk/ > for the sordid details). again, I don't see these as problems, as long as you don't have your own *copy* of the sources. Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
