On 05/25/2012 10:45 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 05/25/2012 12:10 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
>> I recomment to implement 2 separate toolchains with separate packages.
>
> Well, maybe that's true in the interest of expediency, but it's hardly
> an optimal solution. Would it at least be possible to list reasons why
> binutils have to be different, with the hope that they would be reduced
> over time, allowing eventual merging of the toolchains?
Why have more than one gcc or binutils for arm-eabi at all? Just add
multilibs for the extra variants of interest. You can even split the
multilibs out into subpackages if it matters.
This is simply not true. A gcc targeting glibc/linux is entirely
different from a GCC targetting newlib and entirely different from a GCC
targetting another OS.
Ralf