Hi,
More and more VFP-supporting CPUs are coming out lately, and it would
be nice to be able to use VFP on them in a sane way. The existing
Debian EABI efforts have been taking a while, so November 24 last year
I started working on a from-scratch EABI port, sponsored by Applied
Data Systems (http://www.applieddata.net/) Six and a half weeks later,
there's about 6000 debs built, and so far it all seems to work pretty
well.
I can't share the debs yet (internal and customer use only for now),
but I would like to get consensus on armel patches before I start
submitting them.
The first candidate is dpkg. Guillem Jover's patch available here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-embedded/2006/05/msg00032.html
changes DEB_HOST_GNU_{SYSTEM,TYPE} to have -gnueabi at the end. I've
found that this doesn't work too well. For example, util-linux does
stuff like this all over debian/rules:
ifeq ($(DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM),linux-gnu)
MOUNTBINFILES = mount/mount mount/umount
MOUNTSBINFILES = mount/swapon mount/losetup
endif
And ruby1.8 does:
arch_dir = $(subst linux-gnu,linux,$(target_os))
(which turns arch_dir into arm-linuxeabi instead of arm-linux-eabi.)
I asked Joey Hess, and he felt that there are probably more packages
that depend on linux-gnu than on having gnueabi, which makes sense.
The only packages that really need to know about gnueabi are binutils,
gcc and glibc, the rest should just be checking defined(__ARM_EABI__).
Opinions?
cheers,
Lennert
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
