[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710121731110.17887@loopy.telegraphics.com.au>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 17:54:30 +1000 (EST)
From: Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
cc: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>, Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux/m68k <linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make m68k cross compile like every other architecture.
>
> If your cross-compiler is called differently than the default on in
> arch/*/Makefile,
Part of the problem is that there is no compelling default. The name of
the cross-compiler can vary depending on the chosen executable prefix or
the chosen target tuple.
Let's say I create new cross toolchains for both m68k and powerpc. I use
the "m68k-linux-gnu" to follow the m68k default, but let's assume powerpc
users prefer their default "powerpc-linux" so I follow that too. The
result is that I now have gcc's -B option working (or not working) in
suprising ways too.
Uniformity is more helpful downstream than a different arbitrary default
for each architecture. Debian should patch their default into their kernel
source packages if they've standardised on cross compiler prefixes.
> what's the problem with calling?
>
> make ARCH=myarch CROSS_COMPILE=my-cross-compile-prefx-
>
> This has been working for +10 years on all non-ia32 platforms I ever worked on.
But there is no problem with calling that (?). Rob's patch doesn't change
this.
-f
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists