Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 02:18:29 +0000 From: Craig Butler <craig001@lerwick.hopto.org> To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sparc64 doesn't care about you, and you shouldn't care about Sparc64 Message-ID: <20151109021829.626222b1@zbox.lerwick.hopto.org> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfrJfNo2qUn4EG%2BB2ZwN5QgryEPQwPYNs96B46%2Bm6hzonQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <563A5893.1030607@freebsd.org> <2AAC0EF3-528B-476F-BA9C-CDC3004465D0@bsdimp.com> <20151108155501.GA1901@alchemy.franken.de> <CAHSQbTDEUJ=R4BTAx%2BVF55Xb%2BmObhHLgM09%2Bxp-=uP8LbfeoUA@mail.gmail.com> <CAPyFy2ALaBg7jzQSTqkosb9wV=9RMdmc%2BqY2yGWvznt7=yvc7Q@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfrJfNo2qUn4EG%2BB2ZwN5QgryEPQwPYNs96B46%2Bm6hzonQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 18:43:39 -0700
Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> > On 8 November 2015 at 20:46, Justin Hibbits <jrh29@alumni.cwru.edu>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I 100% agree with you on this. If we can update binutils to the
> > > latest and greatest, I believe powerpc64 would be able to work
> > > with clang. I've backported several patches, with IBM's
> > > permission, to binutils for handling new relocations, etc.
> > > However, not all patches are straight forward, and currently
> > > we're missing something, which is causing odd segfaults in ld(1),
> > > when linking as(1). No other binary, only as(1). I've tried
> > > looking through it, but the binutils code is a mess. I'm sure
> > > the bug that's getting hit was fixed with newer binutils, but
> > > have had a very hard time trying to test with it.
> >
> > We have support in the tree to use an external binutils
> > automatically
> > - we use this on arm64, which is completely unsupported by the
> > in-tree binutils. External binutils is enabled by setting
> > CROSS_BINUTILS_PREFIX=/usr/local/${TARGET_ARCH}-freebsd/bin/
> >
> > This happens automatically if the target specifies
> > BINUTILS_BOOTSTRAP in BROKEN_OPTIONS -- for example, arm64 sets
> > BROKEN_OPTIONS+=BINUTILS BINUTILS_BOOTSTRAP GCC GCC_BOOTSTRAP GDB
> >
> > I'd suggest that the first step in any of these discussions is to
> > use this to test building with the binutils port. We know it won't
> > work for mips today because upstream bintuils lacks FreeBSD/mips
> > support. It may work for other targets though. Even if it doesn't
> > the same work needs to be done regardless of whether the target
> > uses an up-to-date binutils from ports or from the src tree.
>
>
> Speaking of CROSS_BINUTILS_PREFIX, we need to unify CROSS*PREFIX stuff
> with the CROSS_TOOLCHAIN stuff. Two different ways to specify thing.
>
> Warner
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-sparc64
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-sparc64-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Hi Folks
I am available to do the dogs work... test patches, compile etc etc.
The last clang venture did not end well.
Would like to help get a modern binutils and co going for sparc64.
Kind Regards
Craig Butler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20151109021829.626222b1>