[re-adding the mailinglist]
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Richard Purdie
wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-10-29 at 07:47 +0100, Kristof Robot wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:08 PM, Richard Purdie
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 19:11 +0100, Kristof Robot wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:
On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 11:30 +0100, Kristof Robot wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Richard Purdie
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-10-27 at 20:54 +0100, Kristof Robot wrote:
> >> Richard, all,
> >>
> >> After bisecting, I found that, since this patch, my toolchain is being
> >> built with soft f
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Richard Purdie
wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-10-27 at 20:54 +0100, Kristof Robot wrote:
>> Richard, all,
>>
>> After bisecting, I found that, since this patch, my toolchain is being
>> built with soft floating point support, while it should be built with
>> hard floating
On Mon, 2014-10-27 at 20:54 +0100, Kristof Robot wrote:
> Richard, all,
>
> After bisecting, I found that, since this patch, my toolchain is being
> built with soft floating point support, while it should be built with
> hard floating point support:
>
> (1) Compiling parent commit 74d8866814aec52
Richard, all,
After bisecting, I found that, since this patch, my toolchain is being
built with soft floating point support, while it should be built with
hard floating point support:
(1) Compiling parent commit 74d8866814aec520822518cc4cb8a942f7069bf7
[1] gives hard floating point support (good)
Within the OE build environment, we supply the correct fpu settings. These
only need to be spelt out for the on-target gcc.
Doing this means the checksums for the core compiler don't depend on the fpu
settings. We exclude the compiler tunes for similar reasons, it doesn't need
to influence the com
