ARM GCC changes

Joel Sherrill joel.sherrill at
Tue Sep 25 13:21:40 UTC 2012

On 09/25/2012 06:47 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 09/25/2012 12:36 PM, Chris Johns wrote:
>> Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> On 09/25/2012 12:04 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>> On 09/25/2012 10:54 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>>>> This is an updated patch for the GCC 4.8. It renames the target
>>>>> "arm-rtemseabi" to "arm-rtems" to bring the ARM tool chain back to the
>>>>> standard RTEMS target pattern "$ARCH-rtems".
>>>> As I tried to tell you several times before, I consider this step
>>>> a) to be silly, because it raises abiguities to the "arm-rtems*"
>>>> target tuple
>>>> and breaks the clear distingtion between "arm-rtems" and
>>>> "arm-rtemseabi*" we
>>>> currently have.
>>> We have only one ARM tool chain configuration in the current RTEMS
>>> development version and this is arm-rtemseabi. The ARM tool chain is the
>>> only exception to the $ARCH-rtems pattern. This is confusing and leads
>>> to special cases in general support scripts.
> This doesn't mean much more but your scripts to be lacking generality.
Ralf this has nothing to do with any script written by any person.
It is years of convention where the primary RTEMS tool chain
for a target is ALWAYS named <CPU>-rtems<VERSION>.

This is the one exception to that pattern.
>>> There is absolutely no
>>> reason to have two ARM tool chain configuration for new versions of
>>> RTEMS.
> I vehemently disagree:
> * arm-rtems4.11/gcc-4.8 would be eabi.
> * arm-rtems/gcc-4.7 would fail to build
> * arm-rtems4.11/gcc-4.7 would expect *-eabi
> * arm-rtems4.11/gcc-4.6 would be abi.
> * arm-rtems* would apply conventions arm*eabi users do not expect.
So what? We have done this before. The i386 used to be COFF.
The SPARC used to be a.out.

There is NEVER a guarantee that a new toolset will build an
old RTEMS or vice versa.
>> +1
>> Please make the change and remove the ARM ABI mess we have. Sebastian,
>> thanks for the patch.
> There is no mess, IMO, this all is bikesheding for no technical reasons
> but for personal reasons.
> All this patch would do is to replace a clear separation with a mess and
> cause further mess. Of course you (Chris) will not experience much of
> the mess Sebastian is causing, because you are not packing the toolchains.
As you told Sebastian, it must be a weakness in your scripts.

We want arm-rtems to be eabi. We do not want an arm elf toolset
at all on the head.

Give it up. Move on. Kill the old toolset.
> Ralf
> _______________________________________________
> rtems-devel mailing list
> rtems-devel at

Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research&   Development
joel.sherrill at        On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
     Support Available             (256) 722-9985

More information about the devel mailing list