Module submission - avr

[Christian Riggenbach]

Am Dienstag, 12. Juni 2007 15.05:24 schrieb Dennis Veatch:
> On Tuesday 12 June 2007 03:01:26 am criggenbach at magahugu.net wrote:
> > Zitat von "Kok, Auke" <sofar at foo-projects.org>:
> > > Christian Riggenbach wrote:
> > >> Am Dienstag, 5. Juni 2007 18.29:34 schrieb criggenbach at magahugu.net:
> > >>> module name       : avr
> > >>> suggested section : science
> > >>> update (y/n)      : n
> > >>> bugfix (y/n)      : n
> > >>> security (y/n)    : n
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Here are the promised modules for the AVR-microprozessors
> > >>>
> > >>> Christian Riggenbach
> > >>
> > >> These five modules are the whole toolchain to compile and program the
> > >> AVR- microcontrollers. the avr module is a profile to install all the
> > >> others.
> > >>
> > >> avr-binutils, avr-gcc, avr-libc are selfexplaining, the avrdude is the
> > >> programmer.
> > >
> > > what is the reason for submitting these packages? It appears to me that
> > > the functionality of these packages really should be merged in binutils
> > > and gcc itself instead.... or is that not going to happen?
> > >
> > > Auke
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Lunar mailing list
> > > Lunar at lunar-linux.org
> > > http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/lunar
> >
> > hi
> >
> > these modules are not for x86 or any other pc-platform. they are for
> > the AVR-microcontroller! so they should not be aplied to gcc or
> > binutils, because normal users need not to compile code for
> > microprocessors.
> >
> > AVR - website: http://atmel.com/products/avr/
> >
> > AVRs are in opinion the best 8bit uC ever, so i create a module to
> > keep track of my versions of the toolchain on my HD. when i noticed
> > that there are geda and pcb modules around, i thinked that somebody
> > could have interest in uCs and submited these modules. so it is with
> > "kontrollerlab", which is a IDE for this toolchain and the progammer.
> >
> >
> > greets
> >
> > Christian Riggenbach
>
> The question is not about what they are for, that's understood. The concern
> for a starter is your patch for what you call "avr-binutils". If you look
> at the download url note it is from the same repository as the binutils
> currently in moonbase (version 2.16.1) and your patch grabs version 2.17.
> Your patch as is simply calls it another name. It also looks like applying
> that patch will cause some intermingling with the currently installed
> binutils.
>
> Some cursory research raises some more questions. Your patches seem to be
> missing, um patches specifically needed for the avr in the area of
> binutils, libc, kernel, uboot, uclibc, gcc. So it appears to me what your
> really asking for is a crosscompile environment. Correct?

yes, it is a crosscompiling toolchain.

but there are no patches to add, you just have to add "--target=avr" to the 
binutils and the gcc. avr-libc is a dedicated libc especialy for AVRs.

there aren't anywhere conflicts!

on my pc, these modules run good and they have, like other crosscompiling 
toolchains also, a prefix ("avr-"). they are, suggested by Dennis, located 
at /opt/lunar/avr with a avr.rc script in /etc/profile.d to 
add "/opt/lunar/avr/bin" to the path.

ulibc, uboot or a kernel are not needed, because this microcontrollers have  
between 1kB to 256kB flash :)

about the intermingling: i think you mean the renaming from binutils-* to 
avr-binutils-* (equal to gcc-* to avr-gcc-*). it's just eyecandy to keep 
track of your sources in /usr/src. i can drop this, because the build is in 
booth modules located in avr-{gcc,binutils}-*/obj-avr/


greets


Christian Riggenbach