[oe] introducing a new architecture/machine; policy ? (and a question)
fransmeulenbroeks at gmail.com
Wed Jun 23 11:54:21 CEST 2010
2010/6/23 Graeme Gregory <dp at xora.org.uk>:
>> >> Also I don't feel empowered to make changes in distribution
>> >> specific files.
> Why not, chances are Angstrom maintainers would be quite happy for you
> to patch angstrom*.conf if you ask us.
distribution != angstrom
There are more distributions out there.
The root cause of the problem is that a distro can specify a version
of a tool (let's take gcc as an example) that is not supported by a
specific hardware architecture.
I'd say what we really need is a way to allow a processor architecture
to specify which versions of binutls and gcc and friends are supported
for that hw architecture.
Mind you I talk about processor architectures, not boards.
(actually I guess this extends to every package that contains assembly
files or inline assembly)
The problem became more visible with nios2 as this is an architecture
that is not (yet) supported by gcc. Patches for now exist only for
More information about the Openembedded-devel