I'll admit that I'd like to stay as close to the official releases as possible. Which means I'd also like patches to be applied as early as possible (providing that they're working and are acceptable, ofcourse) IMHO: If patches are needed, they should be based upon an official release, not some 'random version of good luck'. ;) And I agree; Michael's toolchain is very clean/pretty. Regarding patches: The AVR-size patch; it's not yet officially added to binutils, is it ?
Love, Jens Jörg wrote... >"Jens Bauer" <j...@bruger.mine.nu> wrote: > >> I'll take a look at the Codesourcery toolchain anyway, it might >> contain some good hints and tips. :) > >I took a look at the Codesourcery code. The issue there is that all >you get is a large blurb of hacked up sourcecode, while Michael >Fischer separates his (sparse) patches from the actual source. So >with Codesourcery, you simply get a large "black box" of code. > >Comparing it with a regular GCC tree yields many many differences, and >it's not completely clear which GCC version they based their work on - >presumably simply some SVN snapshot of the day. > >-- >cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL > >http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE >Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) > >_______________________________________________ >AVR-GCC-list mailing list >AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org >https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list > _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
