Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Proposal to update GCC for ARM
Re: Proposal to update GCC for ARM
From: Thomas Martitz <thomas.martitz_at_student.htw-berlin.de>
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:15:54 +0100
Am 08.03.2010 22:07, schrieb Paul Louden:
> Thomas Martitz wrote:
>> Not all. But we're in the process of doing so. I verified the e200v1
>> bootloader. mc2739 will test on his e200v2 (the AMS Sansas are AFAIK
>> the only arm targets where the bootloader (actually, the dualboot
>> code only) is critical, all other are pretty much unbrickable -
>> correct me if I'm wrong).
> Being unbrickable doesn't mean that bootloaders shouldn't prevent us
> from upgrading.
> If we can't get bootloaders to work on them now, if we ever need to
> upgrade bootloaders again it's going to create more hassle down the
> line. We should stick with the currently working system until
> bootloaders and binaries both work 100% with the new system, or you're
> just passing the work off to some future developer.
Sure. I agree.
Received on 2010-03-08