Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

[Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus@mdc-berlin.de>]

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi Theodoros,
>
> Theodoros Foradis <theodoros.for@openmailbox.org> skribis:
>
>> The original patch series was working correctly and producing working binaries. Some
>> flags (that I had been using with 6.2.0) are missing from that version of GCC 4.9,
>> so I added 6.2.0 as an extra option. I have tested it to produce working binaries.
>>
>> Here are some modifications to Ricardo's patches for the arm-none-eabi
>> bare metal cross compiler. The following changes have been made:
>>
>> - I have modified xbinutils to use binutils 2.25.1 from cross-base, as it compiles
>> correctly with it. The version from the svn commit that was used by Ricardo is compiling
>> correct binaries as well. Thus, if it is deemed appropriate, the source for xbinutils can
>> be swapped for the previous one, with (seemingly) no difference.
>>
>> - The xgcc of the original, was failing to find the headers that newlib provided.
>> I have set the native-cross-paths as a workaround. Not sure if there is a better
>> alternative, or if the failure was my mistake.
>>
>> - A package for cross GCC 6.2.0 is added, with appropriate patches for multilib
>> support.
>>
>> - Newlib-arm-none-eabi and newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi have been changed to
>> procedures, taking an xgcc as argument, so as to facilitate building with
>> either version of gcc.
>>
>> - An arm-none-eabi-toolchain procedure is declared, to create toolchain packages
>> for both gcc and newlib version. The four toolchain variables follow. Not sure
>> if it's a mistake to include "nano" in the toolchain version.
>
> This all sounds reasonable to me.  Ricardo was interested in using this
> toolchain for one specific purpose, so maybe we’ll want to check that it
> also works here.  Ricardo: could you comment?

The changes seem reasonable.  I wasn’t happy with using fixed SVN
revisions in my patches, so I’m glad that this can be avoided.

I haven’t yet found the time to apply the proposed changes, build the
toolchain and try it with the Axoloti board.  I hope I’ll be able try on
Sunday to first address your comments, Ludo.  Then I’ll check the
suggested changes made by Theodoros (e.g. using different binutils and
doing without SVN).

Theodoros, I see that your patch set includes some of my patches as
well.  The only changes I can see is the addition of the native search
paths and parameterising newlib with xgcc, both of which I’ll add.
After applying my modified patches I would apply your patches that add
“arm-none-eabi-gcc-6” and the “arm-none-eabi-toolchain”.

Is this acceptable?

~~ Ricardo