[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080327131125.6ec6d5ae@hskinnemo-gx620.norway.atmel.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:11:25 +0100
From: Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jan Dittmer <jdi@....org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for March 27
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:54:59 +0200
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:32:26PM +0100, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 12:47:45 +0200
> > Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > > According to Jan's page, there's still a build error with the defconfig:
> > > http://l4x.org/k/?d=40450#err
> >
> > Hmm...that must be a pretty ancient toolchain.
>
> The oldest compiler the kernel currently supports is gcc 3.2, and
> whenever it's reasonably possible (noone expects you to backport avr32
> support to gcc 3.2) the aim is to support all compilers back to gcc
> 3.2, or at least as far as possible.
We do have some gcc 3.x patches lying around somewhere, but I don't
think that's something we want to inflict on others ;-)
The first toolchain we ever released to the outside was based on gcc
4.0.2, so it is "ancient" in the sense that it has lots of
avr32-specific bugs that later toolchains don't have. I agree that we
should still try to support it as long as possible.
> BTW: What's the status of avr32 support in upstream binutils and gcc?
Still stuck in legal hell, I think.
Haavard
--
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