From: <de...@bb...> - 2009-12-15 16:22:13
|
On 15 Dec, Philip Balister wrote: > On 12/15/2009 10:46 AM, de...@bb... wrote: > > I have a project that apparently doesn't compile properly > > with gcc 4.2.2 (the current cross-compiler) and it appears > > to have worked in the past with gcc 4.1.1 or 4.1.2; is > > "gcc-cross-4.1.1.bb" the right recipe to use to build that > > version of a GCC cross-compiler for the ARM? Also, where > > would it put the build products? I don't want to overwrite > > the 4.2.2 compiler already in place on the build machine. > > Is this C++? It is fairly straight forward to update older C++ to work > with the newer, stricter, gcc versions. A lot of it is, there's also a lot of *generated* C++ (an old version of a CORBA ORB, if that means anything to you), and part of the internal argument is whether to update or to drag along an older compiler. I tend to lean towards updating, but there are numerous voices of various strengths on both sides. Is there an online source to learn how to update the C++? That will add fuel to the argument, I'm sure. :-) Thanks! Dennis Rockwell de...@bb... Advanced Networking Senior Engineer Raytheon BBN Technologies +1-617-873-5745 Cambridge, MA +1-617-873-5386 (Fax) |
From: <de...@bb...> - 2009-12-16 17:07:40
|
On 16 Dec, Philip Balister wrote: > On 12/15/2009 11:22 AM, de...@bb... wrote: [ ... ] > > A lot of it is, there's also a lot of *generated* C++ (an > > old version of a CORBA ORB, if that means anything to you), [ ... ] > I have to ask, SCA? Right the first time! Looks like we have similar scars... Dennis Rockwell de...@bb... Advanced Networking Senior Engineer Raytheon BBN Technologies +1-617-873-5745 Cambridge, MA +1-617-873-5386 (Fax) |
From: Philip B. <ph...@ba...> - 2009-12-15 17:14:12
|
On 12/15/2009 11:22 AM, de...@bb... wrote: > On 15 Dec, Philip Balister wrote: > >> On 12/15/2009 10:46 AM, de...@bb... wrote: >>> I have a project that apparently doesn't compile properly >>> with gcc 4.2.2 (the current cross-compiler) and it appears >>> to have worked in the past with gcc 4.1.1 or 4.1.2; is >>> "gcc-cross-4.1.1.bb" the right recipe to use to build that >>> version of a GCC cross-compiler for the ARM? Also, where >>> would it put the build products? I don't want to overwrite >>> the 4.2.2 compiler already in place on the build machine. >> >> Is this C++? It is fairly straight forward to update older C++ to work >> with the newer, stricter, gcc versions. > > A lot of it is, there's also a lot of *generated* C++ (an > old version of a CORBA ORB, if that means anything to you), > and part of the internal argument is whether to update or to > drag along an older compiler. I tend to lean towards > updating, but there are numerous voices of various strengths > on both sides. Oddly enough, I know *exactly* what you are talking about. Well, except for the orb :) There is an omniorb recipe in OE, but it is older and is having issues with newer compilers. I haven't had time to build a newer version. > Is there an online source to learn how to update the C++? > That will add fuel to the argument, I'm sure. :-) Generally, googling the error message is helpful. There are some at the bottom of this document. That's all I can find quickly :) Philip > > Thanks! > > Dennis Rockwell de...@bb... > Advanced Networking Senior Engineer > Raytheon BBN Technologies +1-617-873-5745 > Cambridge, MA +1-617-873-5386 (Fax) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Return on Information: > Google Enterprise Search pays you back > Get the facts. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > |
From: Philip B. <ph...@ba...> - 2009-12-15 17:14:55
|
On 12/15/2009 11:22 AM, de...@bb... wrote: > On 15 Dec, Philip Balister wrote: > >> On 12/15/2009 10:46 AM, de...@bb... wrote: >>> I have a project that apparently doesn't compile properly >>> with gcc 4.2.2 (the current cross-compiler) and it appears >>> to have worked in the past with gcc 4.1.1 or 4.1.2; is >>> "gcc-cross-4.1.1.bb" the right recipe to use to build that >>> version of a GCC cross-compiler for the ARM? Also, where >>> would it put the build products? I don't want to overwrite >>> the 4.2.2 compiler already in place on the build machine. >> >> Is this C++? It is fairly straight forward to update older C++ to work >> with the newer, stricter, gcc versions. > > A lot of it is, there's also a lot of *generated* C++ (an > old version of a CORBA ORB, if that means anything to you), > and part of the internal argument is whether to update or to > drag along an older compiler. I tend to lean towards > updating, but there are numerous voices of various strengths > on both sides. > > Is there an online source to learn how to update the C++? > That will add fuel to the argument, I'm sure. :-) To throw some more wood on the compiler issue, the older gcc compilers do not have complete support for armv7a either. Philip > > Thanks! > > Dennis Rockwell de...@bb... > Advanced Networking Senior Engineer > Raytheon BBN Technologies +1-617-873-5745 > Cambridge, MA +1-617-873-5386 (Fax) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Return on Information: > Google Enterprise Search pays you back > Get the facts. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > |
From: Philip B. <ph...@ba...> - 2009-12-16 15:12:02
|
On 12/15/2009 11:22 AM, de...@bb... wrote: > On 15 Dec, Philip Balister wrote: > >> On 12/15/2009 10:46 AM, de...@bb... wrote: >>> I have a project that apparently doesn't compile properly >>> with gcc 4.2.2 (the current cross-compiler) and it appears >>> to have worked in the past with gcc 4.1.1 or 4.1.2; is >>> "gcc-cross-4.1.1.bb" the right recipe to use to build that >>> version of a GCC cross-compiler for the ARM? Also, where >>> would it put the build products? I don't want to overwrite >>> the 4.2.2 compiler already in place on the build machine. >> >> Is this C++? It is fairly straight forward to update older C++ to work >> with the newer, stricter, gcc versions. > > A lot of it is, there's also a lot of *generated* C++ (an > old version of a CORBA ORB, if that means anything to you), > and part of the internal argument is whether to update or to > drag along an older compiler. I tend to lean towards > updating, but there are numerous voices of various strengths > on both sides. > > Is there an online source to learn how to update the C++? > That will add fuel to the argument, I'm sure. :-) I have to ask, SCA? Philip > > Thanks! > > Dennis Rockwell de...@bb... > Advanced Networking Senior Engineer > Raytheon BBN Technologies +1-617-873-5745 > Cambridge, MA +1-617-873-5386 (Fax) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Return on Information: > Google Enterprise Search pays you back > Get the facts. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > |