I meant, set with the correct value. "i386-linux-" is preloaded into
CROSS_COMPILE and then at do_compile() "gcc" is appended to it.
Is there in interest, to actually build u-boot in devshell?
Radu
On 08/06/2012 05:13 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Radu,
In message <501fd013.5040...@intel.com>
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Radu,
>
> In message <501fd013.5040...@intel.com> you wrote:
>>
>> CROSS_COMPILE is set in EXTRA_OEMAKE which is used in oe-runmake()
>> within do_compile()
>> Running devshell is achieved in do_devshell() which is run after
>> do_patch()
Dear Radu,
In message <501fd013.5040...@intel.com> you wrote:
>
> CROSS_COMPILE is set in EXTRA_OEMAKE which is used in oe-runmake()
> within do_compile()
> Running devshell is achieved in do_devshell() which is run after
> do_patch() but before do_compile(), that's why in devshell CROSS_COMPILE
CROSS_COMPILE is set in EXTRA_OEMAKE which is used in oe-runmake()
within do_compile()
Running devshell is achieved in do_devshell() which is run after
do_patch() but before do_compile(), that's why in devshell CROSS_COMPILE
is not (yet) set.
I think this is the intended way for things to work,
Dear Radu,
In message <501fc96a.8000...@intel.com> you wrote:
>
> in the new shell
>
> >make coreboot-x86 (without _config)
>
> The output I got is as follows:
>
> Configuring for coreboot-x86 - Board: coreboot, Options:
> SYS_TEXT_BASE=0xFC
> make
> /bin/bash: i386-linux-gcc: command not
I may be recipe configuration, however, here are my steps:
>bitbake u-boot -c cleanall
>bitbake u-boot -c fetch
>bitbake -c devshell u-boot
in the new shell
>make coreboot-x86 (without _config)
The output I got is as follows:
Configuring for coreboot-x86 - Board: coreboot, Options:
SYS_TEXT_
Dear Radu,
In message <501f63ff.1070...@intel.com> you wrote:
>
> > Actually a plain
> >
> > make NAME
> >
> > does the same as "make NAME_config && make all".
> >
> > You might also consider running "./MAKEALL NAME" instead, which
> > aut-adjusts to te number of available cores on the build h
On 08/03/2012 07:19 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Radu Moisan,
In message <1343997523-4117-1-git-send-email-radu.moi...@intel.com> you wrote:
Building u-boot requires UBOOT_MACHINE. In the u-boot README file
building u-boot is achieved with "make NAME_config" and then
"make all". I assumend UBO
Dear Radu Moisan,
In message <1343997523-4117-1-git-send-email-radu.moi...@intel.com> you wrote:
> Building u-boot requires UBOOT_MACHINE. In the u-boot README file
> building u-boot is achieved with "make NAME_config" and then
> "make all". I assumend UBOOT_MACHINE to be the "NAME" part and thus,
On 08/03/2012 03:46 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 03:38:42PM +0300, Radu Moisan wrote:
Building u-boot requires UBOOT_MACHINE. In the u-boot README file
building u-boot is achieved with "make NAME_config" and then
"make all". I assumend UBOOT_MACHINE to be the "NAME" part and t
On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 03:38:42PM +0300, Radu Moisan wrote:
> Building u-boot requires UBOOT_MACHINE. In the u-boot README file
> building u-boot is achieved with "make NAME_config" and then
> "make all". I assumend UBOOT_MACHINE to be the "NAME" part and thus,
> the "_config" addition in u-boot.i
Building u-boot requires UBOOT_MACHINE. In the u-boot README file
building u-boot is achieved with "make NAME_config" and then
"make all". I assumend UBOOT_MACHINE to be the "NAME" part and thus,
the "_config" addition in u-boot.inc
NAME is the machine name, and choices area vailable in boards.conf
12 matches
Mail list logo
