[fedora-arm] Re: How to properly name a cross-toolchain package?

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at freenet.de
Sat Jul 11 08:21:51 UTC 2009


Peter Lemenkov wrote:
> Hello All!
> 
> I plan to add arm-toolchain into Fedora and encountered a difficulty -
> how to properly name the package? From what I found in the Internets,
> the cross-toolchains *often* named with the following prefix:
> 
> <arch>-<vendor>-<operating system>-<libc>-
> 
> For example:
> 
> i686-pc-linux-gnu-
> powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu-
> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-
> 
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/embedded/handbook/?part=1&chap=3
> 
> However sometimes they named differently (arm-none-eabi-,
> arm-uclinuxeabi-, etc). Some cross-compilers already included into
> Fedora, and their packages naming schemes are also different - some
> examples of prefixes are  arm-gp2x-linux-, avr-, msp430-, spu-
> (mingw32 differs from others because it, at least, implies target OS
> and libc).
> 
> I'm sure, it's time to create unified rules for packaging of
> cross-toolchains, but right now I'm asking you for help in proper
> naming of it. Should we name it as <arch>-<vendor>-<operating
> system>-<libc>-gcc

IM(NS)HO: basically yes.

It's the clearest and least confusing from.

> or should we use some other naming schemes? What
> values should be used for <vendor> - "fedora" maybe?
No.

> O should we simply drop this field ("unknown")?
No.

GCC's canonicalization triples (the triples passed as --target=<..> when 
configuring a cross-toolchain) are standardized and can not be chosen at 
random.

What occasionally confuses people is the fact that for some targets 
abbreviations exist rsp. and that theses triples exit in an "external" 
(often abbreviated) and "internal" (fully expanded) form.

Ralf







More information about the fedora-arm mailing list