Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 4 Mar 2015 16:56:53 +0000
From:      "imp (Warner Losh)" <phabric-noreply@FreeBSD.org>
To:        freebsd-arm@freebsd.org
Subject:   [Differential] [Commented On] D2005: Start of arm64 toolchain support (sufficient for kernel-toolchain)
Message-ID:  <ef32d579a6f0de4cdc504615f18b4ee3@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <differential-rev-PHID-DREV-xkiyys7g7nptp5rxbteo-req@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <differential-rev-PHID-DREV-xkiyys7g7nptp5rxbteo-req@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
imp added a comment.

>>! In D2005#9, @emaste wrote:
> I don't fully understand your comment here - if I understand correctly you're saying we should forcibly disable options that can't work on a given platform, not just disable them by default.

Yes. that's what we do in the rest of the tree, in a variety of stupid ways.

> Both binutils and gdb are the same in that regard at least, they both lack aarch64 support.

binutils is a bootstrap. gdb isn't. that's how they are different. But both could likely use the forced off solution.

I really *HATE* options that are different based on the platform. They cause nothing but problems. Every single time. I'd like to find a better way to cope.

REVISION DETAIL
  https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2005

To: emaste, bdrewery
Cc: imp, andrew, freebsd-arm



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ef32d579a6f0de4cdc504615f18b4ee3>