This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.

See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Cross-compiling toolchain default location choice

From: Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric dot com>
To: Daniel Kegel <dank at kegel dot com>
Cc: ncrfgs <ncrfgs at tin dot it>, crossgcc at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 17:48:12 +0200
Subject: Re: Cross-compiling toolchain default location choice
References: <20040913152157.GA31709@ncrfgs3.ncrfgs><4145BC7F.8030203@kegel.com> <20040913160755.GA31831@ncrfgs3.ncrfgs><4145D105.1050001@kegel.com>

On 2004-10-02 at 08:19:45 Dan Kegel wrote:

> That's it.  I'm giving up on 2.4; it's too fragmented.

Well, it seems that in 2.4, Linus never accepted the ARM patches from
Russell King and/or Vincent Sanders into the mainstream kernel.  (I'm
not sure of the reasons for that.)  This is why it has always been a
separate patch, or fork, if you like that term better. :)  Note that
this is the case for many kernel sub-components, such as PCMCIA
support, ISDN support, etc etc.

> I suspect 2.6 is a bit more unified.  If not, well, it's not in
> deep freeze mode like 2.4 is, and the forkettes can be fixed.

In 2.6, the ARM part is integrated into the mainstream kernel since
alsmost the beginning, so it should give no problems with crosstool.

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]