On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:49:55PM +0100, David Kozub wrote: > On Sun, 23 Jan 2011, Michele Brocco wrote: > > > On 1/23/11, Pau Espin Pedrol <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 2011/1/23 David Kozub <[email protected]> > >> > >>> On Sun, 16 Jan 2011, Michele Brocco wrote: > >>> > >>> for those who need it and are old-school 32bit users like me, I manage > >>>> to get a new hard drive and thus built a 32bit toolchain for shr. I > >>>> will try to update it either on-demand or whenever I see I can no > >>>> longer update it with opkg-target :). I uploaded the shr-testing > >>>> version already on Christoph's server (thanks for hosting!). The > >>>> shr-unstable will follow within this week. The url is > >>>> http://www.chonyota.net/freerunner/toolchains/ > >>>> > >>> > >>> How did you build the toolchain? Did you use some recipe that's in OE, or > >>> created a new one? > >>> > >>> I think it would be cool to have SHR toolchain that would include all the > >>> SHR libs by defaul, maybe even vala (what a dream :) ), but it seemed like > >>> nobody is really interested. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> David > >>> > >> And yes, afaik this toolchains are created using OE :) > >> > > Exactly, mine is created with OE as well. I just thought someone may > > need the x86 version. As far as i know vala is not included in the SHR > > toolchain. Why do you need vala in the toolchain? > > Ah, I guess my question was not clear. Obviously the toolchain was built > via OE. What I wanted to know is - have you used a recipe that's already > in OE, or have you created a new one, specifically for SHR? > > I asked that as I saw the label "SHR toolchain", so I thought it might be > SHR-specific (i.e. including the SHR-relevant libs by default, without > extra need to install them). But from your mail it seems it's just the > ordinary Angstrom-like toolchain (meta-toolchain.bb).
meta-toolchain.bb is also how http://build.shr-project.org/shr-unstable/sdk/ are prepared, problem with 32b toolchain is not fully supported "native-sdk" class in metadata and old "sdk" class doesn't allow to choose for which native architecture it should prepare sdk image. So on our 64b buildhost it's easy to prepare 64b toolchain and if Michele has 32b buildhost then 32b sdk is also easy. Michele, can you build a bit newer sdk (with binutils-2.21, after 62dd8921108c06e4d06044fe4a1e3a71c507b79b Mon Jan 17 09:46:55 2011 -0800), I'll download them to http://build.shr-project.org/shr-unstable/sdk/ to save you some bw. Regards, -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected]
pgpKQNsWBgnsD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Shr-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shr-project.org/mailman/listinfo/shr-devel
