From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11631 invoked by alias); 23 Jan 2012 01:07:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 11623 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Jan 2012 01:07:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from virtual.bogons.net (HELO virtual.bogons.net) (193.178.223.136) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 01:07:35 +0000 Received: from jifvik.dyndns.org (jifvik.dyndns.org [85.158.45.40]) by virtual.bogons.net (8.10.2+Sun/8.11.2) with ESMTP id q0N17Y103344; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 01:07:34 GMT Received: from lert.jifvik.org (lert.jifvik.org [172.31.1.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by jifvik.dyndns.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FB7B3FE1; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 01:07:33 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4F1CB2D5.9030103@jifvik.org> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 01:07:00 -0000 From: Jonathan Larmour User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101027 Fedora/3.0.10-1.fc12 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ilija Kocho Cc: ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: Gnutools: consideration for upgrade to GCC 4.6 References: <4F106345.4080902@siva.com.mk> <4F11574D.9070002@dallaway.org.uk> <4F135141.9030908@siva.com.mk> In-Reply-To: <4F135141.9030908@siva.com.mk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact ecos-devel-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-devel-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-01/txt/msg00034.txt.bz2 On 15/01/12 22:20, Ilija Kocho wrote: > On 15.01.2012 19:42, Sergei Gavrikov wrote: [eCos specific toolchains] > It seems there have been some attempts before as there are some traces > left in gcc tree: > gcc/config/arm/ecos-elf.h That was Nick Clifton trying to be helpful to me years ago when he got the wrong end of the stick about a conversation we had. It's not and never has been used. I would ask them to remove it but don't quite feel it's worth the effort for someone to take the time even to remove. > I'm not sure about former addition, But IMO that it would be good to add > t-ecos target description(s). The material is present in eCos patches > ftp://ecos.sourceware.org/pub/ecos/gnutools/src/ . IMHO I disagree. >>> Are the eCos sources going to start requiring use of specific >>> toolchain binaries? >> Nope. Anyone can use own binaries if he/she wants. > > We must be sure of this. People will need, from various reasons, to use > different toolchains (commercial or self built). In which case there's no point putting ecos in the target name. There may well be a point when there is a real tangible technical benefit that overrides the drawbacks. But until then we should not artificially make differences. "Branding" is really not a good reason. Jifl