ANN: microblaze-rtems4.11 toolchain

[Gedare Bloom]

I guess Ralf addressed my primary concern in his "P.S." on the message.

So nevermind my comments -- His judgment on how long to maintain
microblaze tools without seeing a microblaze port is fine with me.

-Gedare

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org> wrote:
> Eric,
>
> That's the problem exactly here. The microblaze port if it exists out
> there is being developed in a cathedral. Now, if someone says they are
> working on this port and gives access to the code then I would have 0
> issues with the tools being publicly available since anyone could
> become an early adopter.
>
> -Gedare
>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Eric Norum <wenorum at lbl.gov> wrote:
>> Agree with Ralf 100%.
>> On projects like RTEMS it's much nicer working in a software bazaar than a software cathedral….
>>
>> On Apr 19, 2012, at 8:51 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/19/2012 05:30 PM, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Gedare, what is your problem?
>>>
>>> Our users need assistance and help to support us. Leaving these users alone and letting them work in their isolated chambers doesn't help anybody.
>>>
>>> Ralf
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rtems-users mailing list
>>> rtems-users at rtems.org
>>> http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-users
>>
>> --
>> Eric Norum
>> wenorum at lbl.gov
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtems-users mailing list
>> rtems-users at rtems.org
>> http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-users