From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 26 15:04:26 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9690466F for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:04:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from vps.hungerhost.com (vps.hungerhost.com [216.38.53.176]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70ED7296 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:04:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [209.249.190.124] (port=59793 helo=gnnmac.hudson-trading.com) by vps.hungerhost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UKVQF-0000pe-GT; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 11:04:23 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) Subject: Re: RFC: "Crochet" build tool From: George Neville-Neil In-Reply-To: <5151B454.9090402@ceetonetechnology.com> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 11:04:23 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1CBF1416-3237-4DCE-8D61-7E998265C887@neville-neil.com> References: <5DFA61DB-70E4-4C3D-ACA0-995A175706C8@neville-neil.com> <5151B454.9090402@ceetonetechnology.com> To: george@ceetonetechnology.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - vps.hungerhost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - neville-neil.com X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: vps.hungerhost.com: authenticated_id: gnn@neville-neil.com Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the StrongARM Processor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:04:26 -0000 On Mar 26, 2013, at 10:44 , George Rosamond = wrote: > Integrating into base would be nice. >=20 > My question would be: just for ARM, or as Tim mentions in his script, > potentially for other architectures also? My thought is that it's more about the fact that you're building for = embedded and the cross archticture part is tangential, but I also don't want to = dump a ton of work on Tim on top of what he's already done. > If so what would be benefit/difference with NanoBSD if Tim's script = was > used for other architectures? >=20 > For embedded-type systems on i386, I always built my own and never got > into Nano. I think this is to make it easier for folks who don't normally do this = to do this. Those of us, you included, who can build their own one off scripts can = do that but the project needs a good way to package this stuff and Tim's script is the best thing to come along in a while. Best, George