On 09/18/2016 10:17 AM, Rich Felker wrote: > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 11:40:28PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote: >> >> >> On 09/16/2016 09:23 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>> On 09/16/2016 04:32 PM, Rich Felker wrote: >>>>> 4.6.3 from kernel.org. >>>> >>>> That is utterly ancient and probaby very buggy. I would recommend 5.x+ >>>> or at the very least 4.7 or 4.8. >>>> >>> Unfortunately that is the latest one available from kernel.org :-(. >>> I'll try to build one myself. >> >> Rich, you really, really need to get an actual release version of >> https://github.com/richfelker/musl-cross-make posted. > > What do you mean? Binaries? There are release tags, though it would > probably be a good time to make another one. > > But this project (musl-cross-make) is not needed for building kernels > -- stock gcc, any modern-ish version, should work fine. The canonical > way (from prior to my involvement) to build sh* kernels is to use a > gcc that supports any ISA level, and this can be done without multilib > libgcc since the kernel provides its own libgcc replacement functions.
The above was an example of somebody using a broken toolchain because there isn't a known-good reference toolchain for the architecture, which the kernel maintainer is known to regression test against. Having such a thing might help people distinguish "bug in kernel" from "bug in gcc". > Rich Rob