Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

[NEW PORT] devel/riscv64-binutils dvel/riscv64-gcc
ClosedPublic

Authored by lwhsu on Jan 2 2017, 1:42 PM.

Diff Detail

Repository
rP FreeBSD ports repository
Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable.
Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.

Event Timeline

lwhsu retitled this revision from to [NEW PORT] devel/riscv-binutils dvel/riscv-gcc.
lwhsu updated this object.
lwhsu edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)
lwhsu added reviewers: br, bapt, sbruno.
lwhsu set the repository for this revision to rP FreeBSD ports repository.
lwhsu removed rP FreeBSD ports repository as the repository for this revision.

Why 6.1 and not 6.3 for gcc why not making it a slave port of the other *-gcc ports?

In D9020#186322, @bapt wrote:

Why 6.1 and not 6.3 for gcc why not making it a slave port of the other *-gcc ports?

This is from https://github.com/freebsd-riscv/riscv-gcc and I am not sure official gcc 6.3 has full risc-v support now.

I have tested this with https://gist.github.com/lwhsu/a266d52bc37523925bca5131523f7806 and build a BBL with the instructions in "Build bbl" on https://wiki.freebsd.org/riscv (without PREFIX setting), then boot in emulators/qemu-riscv:

qemu-system-riscv64 -nographic -m 2048M -kernel /path/to/bbl

I guess this is OK to add these two ports? Or does anybody think that they should be renamed to "devel/riscv64-binutils" and "dvel/riscv64-gcc"?

lwhsu retitled this revision from [NEW PORT] devel/riscv-binutils dvel/riscv-gcc to [NEW PORT] devel/riscv64-binutils dvel/riscv64-gcc.

rename to riscv64-

If no one objects, I'm going to add these ports tomorrow (i.e. after 12 hours)

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Jan 3 2017, 2:36 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.