Re: ARMv4-support in armel/squeeze?
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 12:08 AM, Wookey <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> +++ Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [2010-12-19 21:04 +0000]:
>> weelll... how about creating an easy means for anybody to create
>> their _own_ debootstrap'd cross-compiled starting point, based on
>> _their_ decisions and requirements, and debian can host the most
>> popular ones?
> I quite agree (and have done for years), and am actually working on it
> at the moment.
... i can't help say it though: you are no doubt aware that this very
much looks like "wheel-duplication"; that openembedded's build system
has all this sorted for absolutely years? (there's also portage but
it's nothing like as well-utilised for both cross and native compiling
so i'm curious: is there any particular reason why, instead of
turning an existing tool which does 95% of the work with 10% extra
effort to create the tool, a complete from-scratch
debootstrap-cross-compiler was started instead? [ i can think of
several good answers as to why, btw - it's _not_ a "deliberately
criticising" question. ]
so - the system you're creating: will it be possible, right at the
beginning, to specify the compiler flags and options required?
the reason i ask is that i have encountered a 400mhz ARM926EJS system
which has ... get this: 800mhz DDR2 RAM! (ok, 400mhz bus,
double-data-rate). the memory is therefore as fast as the CPU (!) and
so any logic which says "thumb instructions are faster" is completely
out the window. i would therefore like to do a complete, total
rebuild of the ARM926 debian packages.... with thumb *disabled* but
thumb interoperability enabled and ... well anything else i can think
of that will be deliberately wildly different from "standard" debian
just to get the point across :)
so - will it be possible to do a total rebuild (requiring about 10
minutes of reading documentation to create one config file, one
command line) of debootstrap and beyond, with "ARM926EJS with thumb