[oe] [PATCH] Change the prefer binutils of micro.conf from 2.19.51 to 2.18

Guo Hongruan camelguo at gmail.com
Sun Jan 17 12:07:27 UTC 2010


在 Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:55:18 +0800,Phil Blundell <philb at gnu.org> 写道:

> On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 19:14 +0800, Guo Hongruan wrote:
>> 在 Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:00:23 +0800,Phil Blundell <philb at gnu.org> 写道:
>>
>> > On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 11:22 +0800, Guo Hongruan wrote:
>> >> * the previous default version of binutils (2.19.51) in micro.conf
>> >> cause the default version of glibc failed to build
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Guo Hongruan <camelguo at gmail.com>
>> >>
>> >> -PREFERRED_BINUTILS = "2.19.51"
>> >> +PREFERRED_BINUTILS = "2.18"
>> >
>> > No, this is not acceptable.  Moving binutils forwards to 2.20{.1}  
>> would
>> > probably be OK, but going back to 2.18 is no good since that version
>> > does not work correctly with Thumb code.
>>
>> the toolchain setting in micro.conf is incompatible, which caused this
>> problem. For the preferred version of glibc is 2.6.1 which is set in
>> conf/distro/include/sane-toolchain.inc,
>
> Isn't micro using eglibc?  I wouldn't have expected that you should be
> seeing glibc built at all for that DISTRO.

I set LIBC=glibc in shell environment.

>
>> I think it is better to change the
>> binutils preferred version which is set in conf/distro/micro.conf.
>
> As I said before, binutils 2.18 is not acceptable in general because
> this version cannot do Thumb code.  Glibc 2.6.1 is pretty old and, if it
> is incompatible with newer toolchains, I would suggest updating to a
> newer version of glibc (e.g. 2.10) rather than trying to wind the
> toolchain backwards.

Yes, I think so. Several days ago, I submitted a patch to update glibc to  
2.10 in conf/distro/include/sane-toolchain.inc, but was rejected and the  
reason was that it may break other buildings and had not full tested.

>
> As a last resort we could make the binutils version be
> architecture-specific, and select 2.18 for i386, but I really don't
> think this ought to be necessary.

I agree with you

>
> p.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel


-- 
Guo Hongruan, Embedded Linux Consultant
Skype: camelguo
Twitter: camelguo
http://www.gulessoft.com




More information about the Openembedded-devel mailing list