ANN: microblaze-rtems4.11 toolchain
Thomas.Doerfler at embedded-brains.de
Fri Apr 20 06:28:29 UTC 2012
here I disagree with you. Setting up a proper toolchain for a new target
is non-trivial and Ralf definitively knows best how to do this. If
MicroBlaze _might_ get support, havng a proper toolchain ready is a benefit.
If somebody is interested to porting RTEMS to microblaze, this is one
step further to the goal.
Having a toolchain ready doesn't mean the whole port is done. And
developers should know the difference.
Am 19.04.2012 17:30, schrieb Gedare Bloom:
> I disagree with pushing out toolchains for unsupported/uncommitted
> architectures. It sends the message that we will provide/have support
> for targets that we do not. I should think that anyone working on a
> port they ought to be able to manage their own toolchains until they
> release it publicly.
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ralf Corsepius
> <ralf.corsepius at rtems.org> wrote:
>> By public demand, I have added a microblaze-rtems4.11 to the toolchains I am
>> building for RTEMS.
>> The corresponding patches are integrated into the latest rtems-4.11
>> toolchain patches, which can either be found in
>> rtems-4.11-branch in git://git.rtems.org/data/git/cross-rpms.git
>> or in
>> For now, this toolchain is just a "first, experimental stab", which "just
>> builds", but has not seen any actual testing yet and is meant to be
>> convenience to prospective users.
>> Any feedback welcome.
>> P.S.: I don't mean to threaten anybody, but as I don't have any use for this
>> target myself, I would not have many problems in removing this toolchain
>> again, shouldn't we see an RTEMS microblaze port inside of the sourcetree in
>> "not too distant future" ;)
>> rtems-users mailing list
>> rtems-users at rtems.org
> rtems-devel mailing list
> rtems-devel at rtems.org
Embedded Brains GmbH
Thomas Doerfler Obere Lagerstr. 30
D-82178 Puchheim Germany
email: Thomas.Doerfler at embedded-brains.de
More information about the devel