>
> Hmm. I must have messed up someting in my earlier tests (maybe they
> ran without BUILD_TIMELESS=1?). You're right; the resulting firmware
> images do not depend on the build path, so the extra CFLAGS are not
> necessary.
CBFS binaries (SELFs) cannot contain debug symbols, so -fdebug-prefix
On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 09:10:09PM +0100, Patrick Georgi via coreboot wrote:
> coreboot is normally reproducible:
> https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/coreboot/coreboot.html
Hmm. I must have messed up someting in my earlier tests (maybe they
ran without BUILD_TIMELESS=1?). You're right; the r
Am 02.02.2017 8:39 nachm. schrieb "Trammell Hudson" :
Is there a right way to pass additional compiler flags to the coreboot
makefiles?
Please add them as a test to util/xcompile/xcompile.
We've been working on making the Heads firmware reproducible
coreboot is normally reproducible:
https://te
On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 08:55:56PM +0100, Zoran Stojsavljevic wrote:
> > Is there a right way to pass additional compiler flags to the coreboot
> > makefiles? We've been working on making the Heads firmware reproducible
> > and found that the -fdebug-prefix-map option is necessary to deal with
> >
> Is there a right way to pass additional compiler flags to the coreboot
> makefiles? We've been working on making the Heads firmware reproducible
> and found that the -fdebug-prefix-map option is necessary to deal with
> different build directories. To make this work with coreboot we ended
> pas
Is there a right way to pass additional compiler flags to the coreboot
makefiles? We've been working on making the Heads firmware reproducible
and found that the -fdebug-prefix-map option is necessary to deal with
different build directories. To make this work with coreboot we ended
passing in en
6 matches
Mail list logo