Re: uClibc (was: Emdebian at Linuxworld Exp..)
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 12:34, Erik Andersen wrote:
> On Wed Oct 29, 2003 at 09:07:42AM +0000, Wookey wrote:
> > That is a more sensible default I agree. Makes life difficult for the
> > ARM7500FE people, but it does seem more sensible than making it difficult
> > for everybody else, which is the current state of affairs. If we compile
> > everything for soft-float on arm how hard is it to use the real FPU on the
> > few chips (one chip?) that do support it - does everything need recompiling
> > due to incompatible ABIs?
> > Even in this case I think it's still worth doing, as FPUed arm chips are in
> > such a tiny minority, but Vince might complain (as an arm7500FE machine vendor :-).
> There would need to be a separate hard-float distro for that.
> Each and every binary and library compiled for soft-float would
> be totally incompatible with hard-float.
Would this mean that uClibc would NOT work for processors such as the
AMD ElanSC520 (i486 with FPU) ?