Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Host Arm32 toolchain should be armv6 #39

Closed
ThadHouse opened this issue Oct 27, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #44
Closed

Host Arm32 toolchain should be armv6 #39

ThadHouse opened this issue Oct 27, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #44

Comments

@ThadHouse
Copy link
Member

We should be building the host arm32 toolchain against raspi-bullseye, as that is what all our libraries are built against so they work all the way down on the Pi 1.

@RyanHir
Copy link
Collaborator

RyanHir commented Oct 28, 2022

There is a bootstrapping issue here. This project can build a toolchain targeting a different host than the build machine, but it is unable to build a toolchain that will then be used to build another toolchain. I chose to use the toolchains provided by Ubuntu because it was in the repositories. It might be possible to tell GCC (x86_64 build machine building a ARM32 hosted toolchain) to emit ARMv6 instructions (something like -march=armv6) but I worry that the object code that is included may have ARMv7 instructions (crt1.o, crti.o, etc.).

I do not imagine building C++ code on a Raspberry Pi 1 or 0 is a pleasant experience. Are you certain that these toolchains need to be run on these devices? With how the toolchains are currently built, they should work on the Pi 2 and up.

@ThadHouse
Copy link
Member Author

Well like I posted in the other issue, could you use the docker images that already have the cross compilers in them? That’d solve both this issue and the other one. It’d be fine to use a compiler that was previously built and set up I’d think.

@PeterJohnson
Copy link
Member

Fixed by #44.

@PeterJohnson PeterJohnson linked a pull request Nov 22, 2022 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants