Re: [ECOS] Problem building latest gcc

["Lewin A.R.W. Edwards" <larwe at larwe dot com>]

> > Well, I was working on the assumption that somewhere, at some time,
> > somebody using eCos has generated a toolchain for Thumb.
>
>It's a moving target! We can't QA toolchains every time someone checks in a
>new change to gcc.

Fully understood and agreed, Jonathan - my problem/complaint/whinge here is 
that the install instructions imply that "a snapshot" should work but they 
don't give enough information. At the last time I printed the install page 
a couple of days ago, there was a _specific_ snapshot mentioned that 
did/does not work (20001103 I think? Anyway, I've mentioned it on this list 
a couple of times).

If a particular configuration isn't tested, and isn't known to work, then 
I'm entitled to get a tad peeved if I read an official installation 
document that implies otherwise.

If it is tested, and known to work, then somebody, somewhere must know what 
magic must be checked out of CVS, and this information ought to be in the 
install instructions, surely?

If the Windows install page just said something like "The old version of 
gcc had separate arm and arm-thumb backends, and this was the version that 
was tested with cygwin for eCos use. To get this version, you can checkout 
snapshot date xxxxxxxx. Current versions have merged the two backends and 
we are not aware of a specific snapshot that can be built under cygwin at 
this time", I would be dancing naked in the forest from sheer joy. (No, I 
won't send pictures).

If it simply said "There is no known/supported way to build the thumb tools 
under Cygwin at this time" then I would be not so happy but at least 
accurately informed, and I wouldn't have any complaint to make.

Do you see where I'm coming from on this?

=== Lewin A.R.W. Edwards (Embedded Engineer)
Work: http://www.digi-frame.com/
Personal: http://www.zws.com/ and http://www.larwe.com/

"Und setzet ihr nicht das Leben ein,
Nie wird euch das Leben gewonnen sein."