The Validation lab is shifting to a new location this week so I've
started a graceful shutdown of the tcpanda boards. Merge requests
will continue to queue and run on x86 but will back up until the lab
comes online at the end of this week. If the backlog gets too big
then I'll re-enable an ursa b
On 20 March 2012 01:42, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> I think the "correct" solution to this would be to have the binary toolchain
> built in a multilib configuration that supports both softfp and hardfp, and
> provide aliases for both triplets that configure the right setting, but that
> requires more b
On 19 March 2012 21:48, Konstantinos Margaritis
wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 23:27:17 +
> Mans Rullgard wrote:
>> FWIW, Gentoo has been using arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi for hardfloat
>> configurations ever since gcc started supporting it. That's of course
>> not a triplet, strictly speaking
On 19/03/12 08:48, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 23:27:17 + Mans
Rullgard wrote:
FWIW, Gentoo has been using arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi for
hardfloat configurations ever since gcc started supporting it.
That's of course not a triplet, strictly speaking.
Also fwiw, I
* Linaro GCC
Spun release tarballs for Linaro GCC 4.5 and 4.6. Launched the build and
test runs. When those completed, briefly checked the results, and
launched the package build tests and benchmark runs.
Continued trying to figure out how my NEON 64-bit immediates patch had
caused a bootstr
Michael,
me too.Can you talk to Steve McKintyre and Konstantinos about this?
We've spent the last 12 months trying to get alignment / agreement across
all of the distributions on this.arm-linux-gnueabihf is the least worst,
agreed option.
Dave
On 19 Mar 2012, at 08:48, Konsta
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 23:27:17 +
Mans Rullgard wrote:
> FWIW, Gentoo has been using arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi for hardfloat
> configurations ever since gcc started supporting it. That's of course
> not a triplet, strictly speaking.
Also fwiw, I have been assured from Gentoo developers that t
