On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Philip Blundell wrote:
> Both, up to a point. The "new backend" lets you generate both ARM and Thumb
> code from a single compiler binary. In days of yore (2.95) you had to build
> a separate compiler. If you actually want to start using Thumb the former
> would be a better bet.
Are there any significantly outstanding issues with the new backend?(i.e.
code incompatabilities, etc) I'm currently using a 2.95.2 toolchain for
StrongARM (the one that Jason Chagas put together in an RPM), is there
updated documentation that describes producing a toolchain(w/new backend)
that can generate ARM/Thumb or ARM+Thumb code? Is there any need for such
or is it all self-expanatory?
My apologies if this information can be found in one place, I haven't had
the chance to search all the relevant sites.
Thanks,
Vasant.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm
