[fpc-devel] More on freepascal armhf porting attempt, some progress made but now stuck.

Florian Klaempfl florian at freepascal.org
Sun Mar 11 15:14:35 CET 2012

Am 11.03.2012 13:22, schrieb Jonas Maebe:
> * I'm don't think that requiring yet another different ARM compiler
> binary for this is the proper way. There's already enough confusion
> as it is with ppcarm variants.

But isn't this caused by the fact that we have the same executable name
while it generates different code? I currently think that having even
arm/armeb/armel/armhf as cpu types is the way to go. This allows also to
have units for all four flavours on one system. Currently we simply
don't support the same target cpu but different abi in any way in the
build system.

More information about the fpc-devel mailing list