Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:30:08 +1100 From: Johny Mattsson <johny.mattsson+fbsd@gmail.com> To: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> Cc: arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports cross-compilers vs. native toolchain Message-ID: <CAGW5k5ahyaTest3L0NTe1t%2B%2BYBgpLMkWZNpp=GRyz%2Bg=nMcZLg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8042D895-3B3D-431E-ADCC-A150BDC838ED@kientzle.com> References: <23CB6C35-9450-40BA-9FA3-37C44B328CA8@freebsd.org> <CABt%2Bj0mB4w==h_SQ4YyDM24_wGOjcdZDK9T1N3DqjSkap0VkQw@mail.gmail.com> <E8A24EBE-967D-44F8-A884-3207B3C6F0FE@bsdimp.com> <8042D895-3B3D-431E-ADCC-A150BDC838ED@kientzle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 19 January 2012 16:49, Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> wrote: > Sounds like I should keep poking at u-boot with the > native cross tools=E2=80=A6. > When I was building custom uboot binaries for my Sheevaplugs, I used the CodeSourcery pre-built ARM toolchain for Linux (on Linux). It was the path of least resistance for me, and it worked really well. I don't know if that's a workable path for you or not, but I thought I'd throw the suggestion out there. Cheers, /Johny
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGW5k5ahyaTest3L0NTe1t%2B%2BYBgpLMkWZNpp=GRyz%2Bg=nMcZLg>