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
