Hey,
We use *-*-cegcc. Should I modify the patch so that the prefix if 'arm',
and should I put a star at the end ? The star seems useless to me
Notice that cygwin* and mingw* also have a star. The star enables things
as i586-mingw32msvc (as ubuntu has, probably debian too). It enables
thi
A Saturday 19 April 2008 04:38:37, Vincent Torri wrote:
> > The canonical form to match our toolchains should be
> > arm*-*-mingw32ce* and arm*-*-cegcc*, which always covers the
> > old and the new forms.
>
> We use *-*-cegcc. Should I modify the patch so that the prefix if 'arm',
> and should I p
> For code to be accepted in any FSF project, the author is required to
> transfer the copyright of all changes to FSF. Exceptions
> are allowed when the changes are very small and obvious. I actually
> believe this patch would qualify, if it is introduced as,
>
> "cegcc builds code that runs on
> For code to be accepted in any FSF project, the author is required to
> transfer the copyright of all changes to FSF. Exceptions
> are allowed when the changes are very small and obvious. I actually
> believe this patch would qualify, if it is introduced as,
>
> "cegcc builds code that runs o
Hi Vincent,
Sorry for the delay in responding to this,
A Thursday 10 April 2008 09:05:58, Vincent Torri wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Currently, libtool does not support cegcc, hence (i think that what cause
> it) no shared library can be built.
>
> I've seen that a patch exists in svn:
>
> http://cegcc.svn.
Hey,
Currently, libtool does not support cegcc, hence (i think that what cause
it) no shared library can be built.
I've seen that a patch exists in svn:
http://cegcc.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/cegcc/trunk/cegcc/src/patches/libtool.m4_cegcc.diff?view=markup
and a guy also improved it a bit for
