On 06/05/2012 05:19 PM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Hi,
what is the blocking point for the integration of these patches?
Ping.
--
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
Address : Obere Lagerstr. 30, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone : +49 89 18 90 80 79-6
Fax : +49 89 18 90 80 79-9
E-Mail :
On 06/12/2012 11:53 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 06/05/2012 05:19 PM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Hi,
what is the blocking point for the integration of these patches?
Ping.
GCC uses a *-*-*eabi patterns to destinguish EABI toolchains from other
ABIs. Your endeavour contradicts the spirit
On 06/12/2012 01:23 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 06/12/2012 11:53 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 06/05/2012 05:19 PM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Hi,
what is the blocking point for the integration of these patches?
Ping.
GCC uses a *-*-*eabi patterns to destinguish EABI toolchains from other
Hi,
what is the blocking point for the integration of these patches?
--
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
Address : Obere Lagerstr. 30, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone : +49 89 18 90 80 79-6
Fax : +49 89 18 90 80 79-9
E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de
PGP : Public key
On 05/14/2012 08:51 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 14 May 2012, Joel Sherrill wrote:
There is a long explanation in the PR but the short
version is that although we fully intended to switch
the arm-rtems target from ELF to EABI we never
intended the target name arm-*-rtemseabi* to
become
Hi
Since patches in PRs don't get much attention,
this is an email about the attached patches
from Sebastian Huber and myself to correct
the arm rtems target name situation.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53325
There is a long explanation in the PR but the short
version is that
On Mon, 14 May 2012, Joel Sherrill wrote:
There is a long explanation in the PR but the short
version is that although we fully intended to switch
the arm-rtems target from ELF to EABI we never
intended the target name arm-*-rtemseabi* to
become the preferred arm RTEMS target name.
We want
