public inbox for ecos-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: bugzilla-daemon@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org To: unassigned@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org Subject: [Bug 1001468] eCos GNU tools 4.6.2 Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 08:43:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20120203084233.B3B092F78003@mail.ecoscentric.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-1001468-777@http.bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/> Please do not reply to this email. Use the web interface provided at: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1001468 --- Comment #10 from Ilija Kocho <ilijak@siva.com.mk> 2012-02-03 08:42:28 GMT --- Hi Sergei, thank you for the comments. (In reply to comment #8) > Hi Ilija, > > Thank you for your work. Some thoughts if you let. > > It seems for me that we have to discuss/test, get/maintain such a set of > the patches > > gcc-4.6.2.patch (common fixes for GCC core and g++) > gcc-4.6.2-<arch>.patch (GCC fixes for <arch> architecture) > gdb-7.3.1.patch (common fixes for all architectures) > gdb-7.3.1-<arch>.patch (GDB fixes for <arch> architecture) > > So, minimal set of patches to review and tests for arm targets > (including your cortex-m4 founds) would be > > gcc-4.6.2.patch, gcc-4.6.2-arm.patch > gdb-7.3.1.patch, gdb-7.3.1-arm.patch > Generally I find are 3 categories of patches (speaking about GCC): - Bug fixes/workarounds: (such as LDRD). They are obsolete so I have omitted them. - eCos related changes other than multilib: I assume we still want them and I have applied them verbatim. - Multilib: This required some creative work and we can expect it to evolve in future as eCos gets ported to other architectures (I hope for Cortex-A, Cortex-R). Therefore I have extracted t-arm-elf in a separate file (Attachment 1535) and I would insist keeping it separate. Further I have separated libgcc and libstfc++ patches. They can probably be merged back but I think it's better if they stay separate. > I mean a naming convention (*and splitting*) like used for the patches > from eCosCentric (you know/work with) which are in Public Domain: > > > ftp://sourceware.org/pub/ecos/gnutools/src/ecoscentric-gnutools-20090121-sw-patches.tar.bz2 > > Then it will be easy to test (apply only needed), review, and track the > patches for any supported architecture. More that, then we will be able > to examine any "inter-diffs", looking on 4.3.2 patch set vs 4.6.2 one. > As I could see the most (all?) smart/tricky things and workarounds for > 4.3.2 based toolchain from eCosCentric do migrate to new patch set > (4.6.2). Is it right? Well, I tried to apply old patches for new stuff > and I got not so many FAILED Hunks as I could expect, but I got a few. > Thank you that you get rid all of them. My application was manual, so actually, after some analysis I got rid of some patches :) > > Fortunately, the sent patches can be easy joined/split in arch/noarch > stuffs (there is only one architecture yet) and I would not split fixes > in GCC 'core' and 'g++' in separate patches (that's mine). What do you > think? For example, a fix in 'config/host' for arm targets (attachment > 1538 [details]) I would move to gcc-<version>-arm.patch, etc. IMHO, all fixed > files under **config/<arch>** directories should be located in a proper > <arch> patch. And even more, all tweaks for <arch> in GCC core files > have to be placed also in gcc-4.6.2-<arch>.patch (if that possible). > > Regarding your build scripts. Thank you for sharing it. Unfortunately, > I could not get what you proposed as configure options for binutils/gcc. > I mean magic 'configure' options like --enable-*, --disable-*, --with-*, > --without-* :-) > > For example, I saw behind sha (# --disable-libspp, # --disable-nls, # > --with-system-zlib, etc) and I misunderstood the reason. I think that > build scripts are good things to refer for used options (but, in any > case most from us use own preferences for scripting), so, IMHO, it's > better just to have 3 long lines with clear options for 3 invokes > 'configure' here (and for future documentation) instead any build > scripts. IMHO, the value of one line the options for 'configure' is much > higher than 100 lines above and below the line :-) So, I will appreciate > only 3-lines "script" from you and any experts or three 1-line files > like binutils.configure, gcc.configure, gdb.configure and that will be > quite enough for testing and discuss. I have provided the scripts as a reference how I am building GCC (for the time being). I understand that they may not work in other environment. Also, that was my first experience with building GCC (when I started it was GCC 4.6.0), and you can find traces of my learning process in scripts. Ilija -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-03 8:43 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 101+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2012-01-28 17:48 [Bug 1001468] New: " bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 17:55 ` [Bug 1001468] " bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 17:57 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 17:59 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:00 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:01 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:02 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:03 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:03 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:04 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:04 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:13 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-31 20:39 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-31 20:56 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-03 8:43 ` bugzilla-daemon [this message] 2012-02-03 18:54 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-04 19:40 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-06 9:16 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-11 16:23 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-11 20:52 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-11 21:53 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-14 22:07 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-24 12:29 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-24 12:48 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-26 16:28 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-26 16:49 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-28 14:04 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-02 16:19 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-03 13:48 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-03 14:30 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-03 19:46 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-03 21:18 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-10 23:46 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-13 14:31 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-13 16:20 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-15 15:44 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-15 21:43 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-16 8:36 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-16 16:09 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-18 0:41 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-18 0:43 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-18 13:06 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-19 1:51 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-19 8:01 ` [Bug 1001468] eCos GNU tools 4.6.3 bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-30 15:01 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-30 15:20 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-26 15:33 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-27 9:20 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-27 14:37 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-27 15:25 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-27 16:16 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-05-25 20:32 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-05-25 20:39 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-05-26 2:51 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-05-26 6:45 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-05-26 15:37 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-05-26 22:32 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 17:48 [Bug 1001468] New: eCos GNU tools 4.6.2 bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 17:55 ` [Bug 1001468] " bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 17:57 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 17:59 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:00 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:01 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:02 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:03 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:03 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:04 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:04 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-28 18:13 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-31 20:39 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-01-31 20:56 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-03 8:43 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-03 18:54 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-04 19:40 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-06 9:16 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-11 16:23 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-11 20:52 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-11 21:53 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-14 20:26 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-14 22:07 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-21 20:37 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-24 12:29 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-24 12:48 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-26 16:29 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-26 16:49 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-02-28 14:04 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-02 16:19 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-03 13:48 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-03 14:30 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-03 19:46 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-03 21:18 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-10 23:46 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-13 14:31 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-13 16:20 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-15 15:44 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-15 21:43 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-16 8:36 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-16 16:09 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-18 0:41 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-18 0:43 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-18 13:06 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-03-19 1:50 ` bugzilla-daemon
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20120203084233.B3B092F78003@mail.ecoscentric.com \ --to=bugzilla-daemon@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org \ --cc=unassigned@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).