On 11/01/2013 04:09 PM, Keith Packard wrote: > Agustin Henze <tin@debian.org> writes: > >> * Only C language support. Do you disable c++ for some reason? >> * Link time optimization disabled. Why? > > I wasn't going to test either of these, and I don't like shipping stuff > that I can't test. If you're capable of enabling these and doing some > testing, that'd be great. Yes, I can work on it and do some test. >> Disadvantages >> * It's delivered without any prebuilt libc. You can't build a project "out of >> the box". > > I'm currently using pdclib, which is kinda a disaster, but at least easy > to build. I don't really want to encourage people to use that. Getting > newlib built for this environment is definitely possible, but I haven't > had a chance to work that out. It'd be separately packaged in any case, > as I don't want to force the choice of libc on the users. Yes, I agree it's better separate the libc in another package. I'll take a look to pdclib, I've always used newlib and I never tried another. > I doubt I'll have time to work on newlib before the end of the year at > this rate though; it's definitely something I'd like to see happen. Great! :). I can do this, gcc has integration with newlib and it isn't too hard, I did it other times and with a little patience it works. I'm using gcc+newlib for a while (with a cortex-M3) and it works very well. I'll try newlib-nano too, seems pretty good idea. >> * It's a lot of work maintain a toolchain working well. Therefore maintain in a >> good shape the package applying some patches "by hand" can become in a >> hard work. > > Yup. The patch sequence is very small at present, and I'm hoping that > the CPU-specific patches are upstream by the next time I need to package > this for debian. The goal is to have *zero* patches in all of these > packages, and we're actually pretty close. Ok, perfect. >> I'll close the ITPs that I've created. If you are agree, we can follow the >> discussion in debian-cross. > > Sounds good. As is my general practice, I don't like to work beyond my > ability to test or deploy, so I've packaged only what I'm actively > using. Having other people help out by adding the bits they want would > be perfect from my perspective. It's great, I want to see a good toolchain for bare metal in debian :) and I can help with this. Are you using collab-maint? If not, could you upload it there? -- TiN
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature