Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, Ard Biesheuvel had to walk into mine at 10:22:59 on Monday 24 August 2015 and say:
> On 24 August 2015 at 19:20, Bill Paul <wp...@windriver.com> wrote: > > Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, Ard Biesheuvel > > had to > > > > walk into mine at 10:06:10 on Monday 24 August 2015 and say: > >> On 24 August 2015 at 19:02, Bill Paul <wp...@windriver.com> wrote: > >> > Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, Ard > >> > Biesheuvel had to > > >> > walk into mine at 09:54:08 on Monday 24 August 2015 and say: > [...] > > >> >> Jordan suggested to drop UNIXGCC as well, and introduce MINGW instead > >> >> iff we want the MinGW PE/COFF GCC, and I think we do, if only so that > >> >> we have a LLP64 environment for X64 available to those without the > >> >> possibility or the desire to run a MS toolchains under Windows. > >> > > >> > People should be able to build a known-good crossbuild toolchain. This > >> > is the simplest way to provide that option. > >> > >> Meh. The primary audience of this feature are people building UEFI for > >> X64 on X64, in which case the GCC4x options are arguably simpler. But > >> apparently we agree that we should keep it /and/ support it. > >> > >> > By the way, do you think I can get you to update the > >> > mingw-gcc-build.py script while you're at it? :) > >> > >> I proposed some updates here > >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.bios.edk2.devel/1297 > >> (with you on cc). Care to ack those? > > > > Is there a particular reason why you chose to use binutils from > > www.kernel.org rather than from ftpmirror.gnu.org (other than "that's > > what it was doing before")? > > Nope, that was it :-) > > In fact, I vaguely remember noticing the kernel.org URL and thinking > "hmm that's odd" but for some reason, it did not provoke any action on > my part My attention was drawn to it before because the specific version the script was looking for previously ceased to exist on www.kernel.org, which broke the script. > > In my testing I used binutins 2.25 from gnu.org, and it worked ok. I > > thought it made more sense to get both packages from the same place. > > > > source_files_common = { > > > > 'binutils': { > > > > 'url': 'http://ftpmirror.gnu.org/binutils/' + \ > > > > 'binutils-$version.tar.bz2', > > > > 'version': '2.25', > > 'md5': 'd9f3303f802a5b6b0bb73a335ab89d66', > > }, > > > > } > > Yes, 2.25 would be even better. In fact, it might make sense to wait > for 2.26 to appear, since it adds support for --gc-sections (see the > other part of this thread) which brings performance of mingw in line > with ELF based GCC regarding code size. Fair enough, as long as we don't have to wait too long. In any case, aside from this, the changes look ok to me. -Bill -- ============================================================================= -Bill Paul (510) 749-2329 | Senior Member of Technical Staff, wp...@windriver.com | Master of Unix-Fu - Wind River Systems ============================================================================= "I put a dollar in a change machine. Nothing changed." - George Carlin ============================================================================= _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
