RSB tool binary locations

Chris Johns chrisj at
Mon Jan 18 23:24:16 UTC 2016

On 19/01/2016 10:03, Brandon Matthews wrote:
>> On Jan 18, 2016, at 2:46 PM, Chris Johns <chrisj at> wrote:
>> Did the build fail?
> Nope, successful build.

The gcc may have built but something else may have gone wrong. There are 
a number of parts needed to build RTEMS.

Please note this is a release candidate so we welcome reports of issues 

>> Did you end up with an RSB report file?
> I did. Unfortunately, it's been lost. I recall it being very short (and not enlightening).

If this file was produced the build failed. Have you seen ?

> It sounds like my expectations were good. I'll try to reproduce the problem and report back.

Thank you.

> As an aside, is there a documented way to build RTEMS without RSB?

Not that I know of. The RSB can produce reports of the current build 

Documentation suitable for manual building would be large complex and 
difficult to maintain. The tools can change quickly and the build varies 
between the different architectures. You are most welcome to try but I 
would need to see long term support of it before I would agree to accept 
it into our repos. We are moving the REST documentation standard.

> Having to build the entire toolchain makes the spin-up process a very, very long one.

How long is it taking you?
What host machine?

The only hosts I have come across that take time are Windows cause of 
the POSIX emulation and VMs if not given enough resources.


More information about the users mailing list