Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 19 Jan 2012 09:21:59 -0800
From:      Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com>
To:        Johny Mattsson <johny.mattsson+fbsd@gmail.com>
Cc:        arm@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ports cross-compilers vs. native toolchain
Message-ID:  <7E53112E-DE29-4145-B597-D39AA77252C5@kientzle.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGW5k5ahyaTest3L0NTe1t%2B%2BYBgpLMkWZNpp=GRyz%2Bg=nMcZLg@mail.gmail.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> <CAGW5k5ahyaTest3L0NTe1t%2B%2BYBgpLMkWZNpp=GRyz%2Bg=nMcZLg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Jan 18, 2012, at 11:30 PM, Johny Mattsson wrote:

> 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=85.
> =20
> 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.
>=20
> I don't know if that's a workable path for you or not, but I thought =
I'd throw the suggestion out there.

Were this a work project, I would do exactly that in
order to keep making forward progress.

For the moment, I'm more curious
about just how far I can push this using
FreeBSD tools only.

Tim




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7E53112E-DE29-4145-B597-D39AA77252C5>