On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:19:17PM +0200, Gabor Greif wrote:
>
> (**) ultimately we'll need a 3-stage build for cross compilation,
> because I consider Template Haskell as essential.
An alternative would be a "full" cross-compiler, where a single ghc can
target multiple platforms. This would mean
ping :-)
On 7/11/12, Gabor Greif wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> coming back on the cross compilers issue. As you know, I had a working
> PPC cross compiler in a github fork that did not require any alien
> tools, just a cross-gcc to distill all characteristics of the platform
> that are needed by GHC.
>
>
Thanks for the heads-up, ARM is not that essential, and PowerPC would
be sufficient for my purposes a.t.m.
Cheers,
Gabor
On 7/11/12, Karel Gardas wrote:
>
> Hi Gabor,
>
> thanks a lot for your effort on GHC cross-compilation. You are talking
> about cross-compiling to ARM too. I would like
Hi Gabor,
thanks a lot for your effort on GHC cross-compilation. You are talking
about cross-compiling to ARM too. I would like to warn you here as GHC
HEAD build for ARM is broken since February due to LLVM backend
miscompiling stage2 -- at least that's my analysis of this so far. See
http:
Hi all,
coming back on the cross compilers issue. As you know, I had a working
PPC cross compiler in a github fork that did not require any alien
tools, just a cross-gcc to distill all characteristics of the platform
that are needed by GHC.
Unfortunately this fork has bitrotten somewhat (mostly b
