Hi,
ucli...@browserseal.com wrote:
On 11/18/2009, "Greg Ungerer" <g...@snapgear.com> wrote:
ucli...@browserseal.com wrote:
I'm trying to compile the latest version of uClinux on ARM and the
multitude of errors that I'm getting leads me to believe that this
architecture simply is not supported anymore, hence the first question -
what happened to ARM support and uClinux in general ? Last time I
checked, i.e. about two years ago, it was probably the most popular
embedded distro, at least for ARM - and now it does not even compile !
You are wrong, it does compile. I have an automated build system that
builds approximately 150 board/kernel/lib combinations(*) each night.
Every release is run through this. It compiles GDB/ARMulator with
linux-2.4.x and linux-2.6.x kernels and both little and big endian
and the GDB/Skyeye target with 2.4.x and 2.6.x kernels (using my
arm-linux- toolchains).
(* of course the whole uClinux-dist tree has way more than 150 possible
combinations of board/kernel/lib. With the resources I have that is
about as much as I can cover in a single day. I have just chosen a
variety of interesting targets on a variety of CPU types to test
compile for).
I will send a separate email with compilation errors, I just think that
it would be better to have a separate thread for this general
discussion. Provided there is anybody out there interested in discussing
ARM, which I seriously doubt.
Are you serious?
The only conclusion I can draw from your problems is that people who
choose to use various other toolchains with the uClinux-dist don't
choose to send patches back to make them work properly with the
dist.
I believe I did provide a complete list of the changes required to
compile uClinux with this other, i.e. Codesourcery, toolchain and you
did say that you think it is the toolchain that has to be changed. What
did I miss ?
Patches please.
Please note that people new to uClinux are most likely to use
Codesourcery toolchain, rather than 2007 one from uClinux web site.
I guess I don't follow that logic. Why would someone unfamiliar with
uClinux not choose a toolchain from the links on that page?
Sure I would like to see the dist code work with lots of toolchains.
And I don't want to put a warning like "you must use these toolchains"
on the download pages.
Regards
Greg
P.S. I'm not here to blame anybody, but rather try to make uClinux
better. It did take me some time, a few days to be exact, to find and
summarize the solutions to all the issues with these other toolchain.
Regards
Greg
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: g...@snapgear.com
SnapGear Group, McAfee PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888
825 Stanley St, FAX: +61 7 3891 3630
Woolloongabba, QLD, 4102, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com
_______________________________________________
uClinux-dev mailing list
uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org
To unsubscribe see:
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
_______________________________________________
uClinux-dev mailing list
uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org
To unsubscribe see:
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: g...@snapgear.com
SnapGear Group, McAfee PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888
8 Gardner Close FAX: +61 7 3217 5323
Milton, QLD, 4064, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com
_______________________________________________
uClinux-dev mailing list
uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org
To unsubscribe see:
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
