On 1/25/11, Martin Jansa <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:49:55PM +0100, David Kozub wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2011, Michele Brocco wrote:
>>
>> > On 1/23/11, Pau Espin Pedrol <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> 2011/1/23 David Kozub <[email protected]>
>> >>
>> >>> On Sun, 16 Jan 2011, Michele Brocco wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>  for those who need it and are old-school 32bit users like me, I
>> >>> manage
>> >>>> to get a new hard drive and thus built a 32bit toolchain for shr. I
>> >>>> will try to update it either on-demand or whenever I see I can no
>> >>>> longer update it with opkg-target :). I uploaded the shr-testing
>> >>>> version already on Christoph's server (thanks for hosting!). The
>> >>>> shr-unstable will follow within this week. The url is
>> >>>> http://www.chonyota.net/freerunner/toolchains/
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> How did you build the toolchain? Did you use some recipe that's in OE,
>> >>> or
>> >>> created a new one?
>> >>>
>> >>> I think it would be cool to have SHR toolchain that would include all
>> >>> the
>> >>> SHR libs by defaul, maybe even vala (what a dream :) ), but it seemed
>> >>> like
>> >>> nobody is really interested.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>> David
>> >>>
>> >> And yes, afaik this toolchains are created using OE :)
>> >>
>> > Exactly, mine is created with OE as well. I just thought someone may
>> > need the x86 version. As far as i know vala is not included in the SHR
>> > toolchain. Why do you need vala in the toolchain?
>>
>> Ah, I guess my question was not clear. Obviously the toolchain was built
>> via OE. What I wanted to know is - have you used a recipe that's already
>> in OE, or have you created a new one, specifically for SHR?
>>
>> I asked that as I saw the label "SHR toolchain", so I thought it might be
>> SHR-specific (i.e. including the SHR-relevant libs by default, without
>> extra need to install them). But from your mail it seems it's just the
>> ordinary Angstrom-like toolchain (meta-toolchain.bb).
>
> meta-toolchain.bb is also how
> http://build.shr-project.org/shr-unstable/sdk/ are prepared, problem
> with 32b toolchain is not fully supported "native-sdk" class in metadata
> and old "sdk" class doesn't allow to choose for which native
> architecture it should prepare sdk image. So on our 64b buildhost it's
> easy to prepare 64b toolchain and if Michele has 32b buildhost then 32b
> sdk is also easy.
>
> Michele, can you build a bit newer sdk (with binutils-2.21, after
> 62dd8921108c06e4d06044fe4a1e3a71c507b79b Mon Jan 17 09:46:55 2011
> -0800), I'll download them to
> http://build.shr-project.org/shr-unstable/sdk/ to save you some bw.
>
> Regards,
>
Sure! I will do that asap and notify you per email once it's done
including the download link.

Regards,

Michele
_______________________________________________
Shr-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shr-project.org/mailman/listinfo/shr-devel

Reply via email to