SSD on the Netwinder

Daniel Gimpelevich daniel at
Sat Apr 20 11:45:56 PDT 2019

On Thu, 2019-04-18 at 09:33 -0400, Ralph Siemsen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 10:01:18PM -0400, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> >
> >That only covered the kernel.  Do we know if userland can be handled
> >so simply?
> When I tried it a few years back, I did it the 'hard' way: modifying the 
> makefile of each project to add the extra linker flag. It was very 
> tedious and I only did a handful of packages.
> A better approach is to change the gcc wrapper. I believe that is what 
> Douglas Paul did (see 
> And I have noticed that there is a similar patch, for newer gcc, that is 
> carried in the Yocto/openEmbedded project streams.
> >Has -march=armv4 actually gone?
> Evidently not yet. Yesterday I built with gcc-7.4.0, and today I have 
> done another build with gcc-8.3.0. Both versions are producing armv4 
> binaries without need for any special linker flags.
> >Would it be better to use the last GCC that supported -march=v4?  I
> >assume that since the loss of support was in the future in 2017, it
> >might not be too much of a downgrade.  The LKML message suggests that
> >GCC 8.0 would likely be the first compiler without armv4 support.
> I had read the same lkml thread, while trying to remember about the 
> --fix-v4bx option. But I don't think that patch actually got merged into 
> the mainline.

Rereading the page, it's unclear
whether gcc8 tweaks will allow the armel port to support StrongARM as
v4t. You think it might be possible?

More information about the Netwinder mailing list