On Wednesday, 06.05.2015 at 14:20, Ian Jackson wrote: > The alternative is to either (a) make the cross toolchains > non-coinstallable or (b) do something nightmarish to the portable > package's build system to try to bodge the link step (and maybe bodge > the compiler) (c) indicate via environment variables (or perhaps PATH) > what the target is. All of those are very undesirable and > nonstandard.
Any particular reason why option (c) with an environment variable is undesirable? I can understand it's nonstandard, but then rump kernels are also nonstandard :-) This would allow for a more flexible approach in adding support for new targets, consider e.g. adding just a "target configuration file" + DT to the toolchain to support a new ARM board. Martin
