svn commit: trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils

[Peter Korsgaard-3]

Author: jacmet
Date: 2009-03-03 22:09:50 +0000 (Tue, 03 Mar 2009)
New Revision: 25513

Log:
binutils: add 2.19.1

Modified:
   trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/Config.in
   trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/binutils.mk


Changeset:
Modified: trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/Config.in
===================================================================
--- trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/Config.in 2009-03-03 21:23:34 UTC (rev 25512)
+++ trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/Config.in 2009-03-03 22:09:50 UTC (rev 25513)
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 
 choice
  prompt "Binutils Version"
- default BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_19
+ default BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_19_1
  help
   Select the version of binutils you wish to use.
 
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
 
  config BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_18
  depends on !BR2_nios2
+ depends on BR2_DEPRECATED
  depends on BR2_EXT_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_18
  bool "binutils 2.18"
 
@@ -50,7 +51,13 @@
 
  config BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_19
  depends on !BR2_avr32 && !BR2_nios2
+ depends on BR2_DEPRECATED || BR2_RECENT
  bool "binutils 2.19"
+
+ config BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_19_1
+ depends on !BR2_avr32 && !BR2_nios2
+ bool "binutils 2.19.1"
+
 endchoice
 
 config BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION
@@ -65,6 +72,7 @@
  default "2.18.50.0.8" if BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_18_50_0_8
  default "2.18.50.0.9" if BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_18_50_0_9
  default "2.19" if BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_19
+ default "2.19.1" if BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_19_1
 
 config BR2_EXTRA_BINUTILS_CONFIG_OPTIONS
  string "Additional binutils options"

Modified: trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/binutils.mk
===================================================================
--- trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/binutils.mk 2009-03-03 21:23:34 UTC (rev 25512)
+++ trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/binutils.mk 2009-03-03 22:09:50 UTC (rev 25513)
@@ -9,6 +9,9 @@
 EXTRA_BINUTILS_CONFIG_OPTIONS=$(strip $(subst ",, $(BR2_EXTRA_BINUTILS_CONFIG_OPTIONS)))
 #"))
 BINUTILS_SITE:=$(BR2_KERNEL_MIRROR)/linux/devel/binutils
+ifeq ($(BINUTILS_VERSION),2.19.1)
+BINUTILS_SITE:=$(BR2_GNU_MIRROR)/binutils/
+endif
 ifeq ($(BINUTILS_VERSION),2.19)
 BINUTILS_SITE:=$(BR2_GNU_MIRROR)/binutils/
 endif

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@...
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

Hi Peter,

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 7:09 PM,  <jacmet@...> wrote:

> Changeset:
> Modified: trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/Config.in
> ===================================================================
> --- trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/Config.in        2009-03-03 21:23:34 UTC (rev 25512)
> +++ trunk/buildroot/toolchain/binutils/Config.in        2009-03-03 22:09:50 UTC (rev 25513)
> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
>
>        config BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_18
>                depends on !BR2_nios2
> +               depends on BR2_DEPRECATED
>                depends on BR2_EXT_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_18
>                bool "binutils 2.18"
>

This breaks AVR32 external toolchain thing. I tried to make it:
depends on BR2_DEPRECATED if !BR2_avr32

but it didn't work, looks like kconfig doesn't accept ! logic with depends

Is there a way around? Right now I've removed that line from my local
repository to keep things working.

Kind Regards,
   Thiago A. Correa
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@...
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Peter Korsgaard-3]

>>>>> "Thiago" == Thiago A Corrêa <thiago.correa@...> writes:

Hi,

 >> +               depends on BR2_DEPRECATED
 >>                depends on BR2_EXT_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_18
 >>                bool "binutils 2.18"
 >>

 Thiago> This breaks AVR32 external toolchain thing. I tried to make it:
 Thiago> depends on BR2_DEPRECATED if !BR2_avr32

 Thiago> but it didn't work, looks like kconfig doesn't accept ! logic
 Thiago> with depends

I think depends on BR2_DEPRECATED || BR2_avr32 works.

Sorry, I keep on forgetting about avr32 being so special.

I'll fix it.

 Thiago> Is there a way around? Right now I've removed that line from
 Thiago> my local repository to keep things working.

How's avr32 support for newer binutils/gcc going?

--
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@...
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

Hi,

>  Thiago> This breaks AVR32 external toolchain thing. I tried to make it:
>  Thiago> depends on BR2_DEPRECATED if !BR2_avr32
>
>  Thiago> but it didn't work, looks like kconfig doesn't accept ! logic
>  Thiago> with depends
>
> I think depends on BR2_DEPRECATED || BR2_avr32 works.
> Sorry, I keep on forgetting about avr32 being so special.
> I'll fix it.

Thanks, it's fixed now.

>
> How's avr32 support for newer binutils/gcc going?
>

I wish I knew. I've asked Atmel's support twice already to forward it
as a "customer wish", in a hope that they would speed up (or actually
start), but it was to no avail so far.

I guess all I can do now is keep my fingers crossed.
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@...
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Hans-Christian Egtvedt-5]

On Sat, 7 Mar 2009 23:20:36 -0300
Thiago A. Corrêa <thiago.correa@...> wrote:

<snipp>

> > How's avr32 support for newer binutils/gcc going?
> >
>
> I wish I knew. I've asked Atmel's support twice already to forward it
> as a "customer wish", in a hope that they would speed up (or actually
> start), but it was to no avail so far.
>

Last news, about a month ago, is that the legal papers are gathering
signatures. First attempt to gather signatures lead to a deadlock, FSF
waiting for Atmel, Atmel waiting for FSF. But now they are, AFAIK, back
on track.

<snipp>

--
Best regards,
Hans-Christian Egtvedt
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@...
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Peter Korsgaard-3]

>>>>> "Hans-Christian" == Hans-Christian Egtvedt <hans-christian.egtvedt@...> writes:

 Hans-Christian> Last news, about a month ago, is that the legal
 Hans-Christian> papers are gathering signatures. First attempt to
 Hans-Christian> gather signatures lead to a deadlock, FSF waiting for
 Hans-Christian> Atmel, Atmel waiting for FSF. But now they are,
 Hans-Christian> AFAIK, back on track.

Thanks - Ok, that's all the legal stuff - But what about the technical
work? I guess the FSF isn't particular interested in patches against
binutils 2.18 from 2007?

--
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@...
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Hans-Christian Egtvedt-5]

On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 09:00:59 +0100
Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@...> wrote:

> >>>>> "Hans-Christian" == Hans-Christian Egtvedt
> >>>>> <hans-christian.egtvedt@...> writes:
>
>  Hans-Christian> Last news, about a month ago, is that the legal
>  Hans-Christian> papers are gathering signatures. First attempt to
>  Hans-Christian> gather signatures lead to a deadlock, FSF waiting for
>  Hans-Christian> Atmel, Atmel waiting for FSF. But now they are,
>  Hans-Christian> AFAIK, back on track.
>
> Thanks - Ok, that's all the legal stuff - But what about the technical
> work? I guess the FSF isn't particular interested in patches against
> binutils 2.18 from 2007?
>

Atmel will submit patches against current HEAD/trunk of course.

--
Best regards,
Hans-Christian Egtvedt
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@...
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Peter Korsgaard-3]

>>>>> "Hans-Christian" == Hans-Christian Egtvedt <hans-christian.egtvedt@...> writes:

Hi,

 >> Thanks - Ok, that's all the legal stuff - But what about the technical
 >> work? I guess the FSF isn't particular interested in patches against
 >> binutils 2.18 from 2007?
 >>

 Hans-Christian> Atmel will submit patches against current HEAD/trunk of course.

Great, does that mean that there's patches for 2.19(.1) somewhere that
we could move to in BR?

--
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@...
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Hans-Christian Egtvedt-5]

On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 09:24:29 +0100
Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@...> wrote:

> >>>>> "Hans-Christian" == Hans-Christian Egtvedt
> >>>>> <hans-christian.egtvedt@...> writes:
>
> Hi,
>
>  >> Thanks - Ok, that's all the legal stuff - But what about the
>  >> technical work? I guess the FSF isn't particular interested in
>  >> patches against binutils 2.18 from 2007?
>  >>
>
>  Hans-Christian> Atmel will submit patches against current HEAD/trunk
> of course.
>
> Great, does that mean that there's patches for 2.19(.1) somewhere that
> we could move to in BR?
>

Not officially, no.

--
Best regards,
Hans-Christian Egtvedt
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@...
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot