[rtems-crossrpms commit] Reflect arm-rtems being history.
joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com
Sun Apr 29 13:36:48 UTC 2012
I would have thought by now you would hhave understood the right thing to do. Let me explain it once again:
+ CPU-rtems ALWAYS exists and is the recommended primary toolset
+ During transition periods. CPU-rtemsXXX may be needed as a safety net for the older target configuration
In this particular situation, we have 3 target names:
+ arm-rtems - was ELF should be switched to EABI
+ arm-rtemself - needed to have old target available as backup
+ arm-rtemseabi - needed to have new version
There should be binaries for arm-rtems and whatever is the secondary (whether coming or going) format.
This was done multiple times for a.out to coff and coff to elf transitions.
Ralf did you not understand what to do or are you deliberately being childish difficult? Given your behavior in general, I know my opinion.
Packaging the tools is supposed to be a service to the community not a way to dictate to developers what to use as host OSes or object format. Listen to those who are daily using RTEMS to do their jobs and build systems. Users define the requirements for RTEMS itself. Do the same for the tools.
Ralf Corsepius <ralf at rtems.org> wrote:
>Author: Ralf Corsépius <ralf.corsepius at rtems.org>
>Date: Fri Apr 27 12:07:53 2012 +0200
>Reflect arm-rtems being history.
> .gitignore | 1 -
> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
>index 327a1f4..1a66d6d 100644
>@@ -4,7 +4,6 @@
>rtems-vc mailing list
>rtems-vc at rtems.org
More information about the devel