Luigi Mantellini wrote:
> Hi Felix
>
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Felix Fietkau <n...@openwrt.org> wrote:
>> Though you prefer this option, I believe using external toolchain
>> support in OpenWrt will always be the exception, not the rule. We can
>> easily add toolchains like CodeSourcery's or ELDK's to our own build
>> infrastructure, as their sources are open as well.
>> Even external toolchain support itself does not guarantee any form of
>> consistency, since you could have accidentally used the wrong toolchain
>> and the system might not notice. Because of that, I also consider the
>> dependency on external toolchains to be bogus.
>
> Ok. I agree. I know that "external" is not equivalent to say "reliable".
>
>> Here's how I would ensure consistency:
>> - Change OpenWrt toolchain identification string to include the arch
>> - On each distcc build host, compile a simple test program such as
>> 'int main(int argc, char **argv){ return 0; }' to assembler and grep for
>> the .ident string and compare it against the same thing on the local
>> machine.
>
> ok good idea.
>
> Anyway, I include my last patch version. I just tested compiling a
> kernel and busybox of an arm target using the codesourcery
> toolchain... it seems to work fine but I interrupted the compilation
> (today is sunday... and I need to see also the sun).
> We can consider this patch as start point, if you agree.
Yep, sounds good. By the way, I'm currently working on integrating a gcc
version with CodeSourcery patches into OpenWrt. Maybe that way you also
won't have to use external toolchains anymore. I've stripped the diff of
the latest codesourcery toolchain against upstream gcc 4.3.3 down to
around 2M in size and merged it with our other patches. I'm currently
checking whether it compiles...
- Felix
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
