Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> writes:

> Theodoros Foradis <teo...@gmail.com> writes:
>> Hi,
>> I see that the original patches were applied in master. Did you check if
>> cross-binutils with 2.25.1 source works for your use case?
> Yes, I’m using the regular cross-binutils.  Thanks for the hint!
>> Would you like me to reformat my patches for gcc-6.2.0, so that they can
>> be applied on current master, or is there some other issue blocking that?
> No, it’s good.  I’m going to apply your patches shortly.  (Just haven’t
> found the time to do so.)

I’m sorry for the delay, but a variant of your patches is now in master
as of 569f60164920a36e6597fe25e9373f97f89e8860.

Since my patches had changed I needed to modify your patches a little to
ensure they can be applied.  I also made a few other changes:

* I kept the newlib packages as variables, not procedures, using
  package inheritance instead to override the value of xgcc.
* The toolchain generator procedure’s name (rather than the version)
  includes “-nano” when appropriate.  The version of the toolchain
  package is just the version of xgcc.
* Added the patches to the list of patches in “gnu/local.mk”

I successfully built the cross-compiler based on GCC 6 after these
changes, so everything should work as intended.

Thanks again for your contributions!

~~ Ricardo

Reply via email to