[Bug 509798] Review Request: armv5tel-unknown-linux-gnueabi-binutils - A GNU collection of binary utilities

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=509798


Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|Review Request:             |Review Request:
                   |armv5tel-fedora-linux-gnuea |armv5tel-unknown-linux-gnue
                   |bi-binutils - A GNU         |abi-binutils - A GNU
                   |collection of binary        |collection of binary
                   |utilities                   |utilities




--- Comment #9 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov at gmail.com>  2009-07-28 09:32:42 EDT ---
Ok, after some googling, I suspect that the only proper way is to use "unknown"
as vendor field, since it definitely shows, that our cross-toolchain intended
for wide use and not locked to some particular hardware.

See also these links:

http://www.mail-archive.com/autoconf@gnu.org/msg00969.html
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/embedded/handbook/?part=1&chap=3

Here is a brief answer for my question from Ralf Corsepius:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.arm/191/focus=117221

Here are the previous Fedora-related discussions about cross-compiling in
general:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel/41315
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel/56709

Ok, renamed back and updated to the latest "main" binutils:

http://peter.fedorapeople.org/armv5tel-unknown-linux-gnueabi-binutils.spec
http://peter.fedorapeople.org/armv5tel-unknown-linux-gnueabi-binutils-2.19.51.0.14-30.fc11.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.