SSD on the Netwinder

Daniel Gimpelevich daniel at gimpelevich.san-francisco.ca.us
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 
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/netwinder/2017-August/000267.html)
> 
> 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 https://wiki.debian.org/ArmEabiPort 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