Thanks Jonas, I'll try it this evening and see if it works.
Ido http://ik.homelinux.org/ On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Jonas Maebe <jonas.ma...@elis.ugent.be>wrote: > > On 30 Nov 2009, at 22:22, ik wrote: > > > It uses ARM EABI version. My latest attempt provides me the following > > executable: > > ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1, statically linked, not > stripped > > > > While on "regular" Linux the same file identifier is: > > hello: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), statically > > linked, for GNU/Linux 2.4.0, stripped > > > > A normal executable in OM is: > > ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.24, > > dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped > > > > So how can I look for the proper build of ppcrossarm and normal ppcarm ? > > Static or dynamic is unlikely to be related to your problems with illegal > instructions. The backtrace you previously posted (with the illegal opcode > in sysinitfpu suggests that you are not compiling an EABI compiler, because > that one defaults to softfloat. There's another thing I just noticed in your > previous mail: > > > make OPT='dFPC_ARMEL -dFPC_ABI_EABI -Xd' OS=TARGET=linux CPU_TARGET=arm > > That first parameter is missing a dash (-), it should read -dFPC_ARMEL. > Without that dash, you will not get an EABI compiler. > > You should also not define -dFPC_ABI_EABI yourself. The compiler will > define that symbol when the current target is EABI. Defining that symbol > while you are not compiling for an EABI platform will only result in an RTL > with invalid code. > > > Jonas_______________________________________________ > fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org > http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel >
_______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
