MK_ARM_EABI to retire in current

[John-Mark Gurney]

John Hay wrote this message on Wed, May 21, 2014 at 21:28 +0200:
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 09:50:21AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > isn't eabi on the xscale still broken?
> 
> It might still be broken. But there are more brokenness than that. :-(
> By defining WITHOUT_ARM_EABI=yes in src.conf, I can get an AVILA kernel
> built that boots with src from head at around mid December. Latest 10
> and head just give no output, with or without WITHOUT_ARM_EABI defined.

Did you apply the patch I referenced in:
https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140219172938.GH34851@funkthat.com

that was sent to you?  This should fix 10, and HEAD should be fine
unless there has been a regression in the last few months...  I haven't
worked on the AVILA since no one is interested in helping me...

> > On 19 May 2014 08:40, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > MK_ARM_EABI is going to die in current. It is the default for all platforms currently. I???m eliminating it as a build option. It must die because it invisibly (to uname) effects the ABI.
> > >
> > > So, to that end, I see two options:
> > >
> > > (1) Retire and remove oabi support.
> > > (2) Retain oabi support, but change its name to armo and armoeb.
> > >
> > > The rough consensus of arm developers I???ve polled now, and in the past, is that we just let oabi support die now that EABI support is working for everybody.
> > >
> > > Before I pull the trigger on this, however, I must ask if anybody has a problem with my doing option (1), and if so, what keeps you using oabi.

-- 
  John-Mark Gurney				Voice: +1 415 225 5579

     "All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."