On 15-Dec-2007, at 03:01 , Pedro Alves wrote:
Jack Jansen wrote:
Aha!
Now I think I start to understand why I had a lot of problems
building ffmpeg with cegcc: the assembly files didn't compile. So
apparently the ffmpeg developers used a different gcc-based
toolchain which has an as
Jack Jansen wrote:
> Aha!
> Now I think I start to understand why I had a lot of problems
> building ffmpeg with cegcc: the assembly files didn't compile. So
> apparently the ffmpeg developers used a different gcc-based toolchain
> which has an assembler with a different syntax.
>
Of cours
On 14-Dec-2007, at 11:59 , Jacek M. Holeczek wrote:
> Hi,
> in general, one can find several free GNU toolchains for the ARM CPU.
> I was wondering if one could "re-use" these toolchains for WinCE
> programming. If yes then, the MinGW32CE project could just
> concentrate on
> developing the lib
Jacek M. Holeczek wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm not that much in the "cross-business", but ...
>
> > No. Sorry. The whole toolchain is targeted at producing
> > Windows CE PE binaries. You'll always need gcc and binutils
> > built with --target=mingw32ce/cegcc/pe. And, we have important
> > (...)
> > You
Hi,
I'm not that much in the "cross-business", but ...
> No. Sorry. The whole toolchain is targeted at producing
> Windows CE PE binaries. You'll always need gcc and binutils
> built with --target=mingw32ce/cegcc/pe. And, we have important
> (...)
> You wont be able to use any of those, becaus
Jacek M. Holeczek wrote:
> Hi,
> in general, one can find several free GNU toolchains for the ARM CPU.
> I was wondering if one could "re-use" these toolchains for WinCE
> programming. If yes then, the MinGW32CE project could just concentrate on
> developing the libraries, not the toolchain itself.
