Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 09:21:59 -0800 From: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> To: Johny Mattsson <johny.mattsson+fbsd@gmail.com> Cc: arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports cross-compilers vs. native toolchain Message-ID: <7E53112E-DE29-4145-B597-D39AA77252C5@kientzle.com> In-Reply-To: <CAGW5k5ahyaTest3L0NTe1t%2B%2BYBgpLMkWZNpp=GRyz%2Bg=nMcZLg@mail.gmail.com> References: <23CB6C35-9450-40BA-9FA3-37C44B328CA8@freebsd.org> <CABt%2Bj0mB4w==h_SQ4YyDM24_wGOjcdZDK9T1N3DqjSkap0VkQw@mail.gmail.com> <E8A24EBE-967D-44F8-A884-3207B3C6F0FE@bsdimp.com> <8042D895-3B3D-431E-ADCC-A150BDC838ED@kientzle.com> <CAGW5k5ahyaTest3L0NTe1t%2B%2BYBgpLMkWZNpp=GRyz%2Bg=nMcZLg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 18, 2012, at 11:30 PM, Johny Mattsson wrote: > On 19 January 2012 16:49, Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> wrote: > Sounds like I should keep poking at u-boot with the > native cross tools=85. > =20 > When I was building custom uboot binaries for my Sheevaplugs, I used = the CodeSourcery pre-built ARM toolchain for Linux (on Linux). It was = the path of least resistance for me, and it worked really well. >=20 > I don't know if that's a workable path for you or not, but I thought = I'd throw the suggestion out there. Were this a work project, I would do exactly that in order to keep making forward progress. For the moment, I'm more curious about just how far I can push this using FreeBSD tools only. Tim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7E53112E-DE29-4145-B597-D39AA77252C5>