[Buildroot] [PATCH v8 01/10] package/binutils-bare-metal: new package

[Frager, Neal]

Hi Thomas,

> Thank you for your research.  I had not looked into how to fix
> newlib, so that it installs to the correct place to begin with.
> 
> From my side, I think patching newlib is clearly better because we
> can try to upstream the patch to newlib.  Once upstream, no patch or
> fix up hack will be needed anymore when we bump to a newer newlib
> version.
> 
> I will test this patch with your branch as well to verify that we can
> remove my fix up post installation hack.  If this patch works, I
> propose going with the patch.

> Well, the thing is that there is probably a reason why upstream does
> not install headers/libs in the standard location and decides to go
> with this custom tooldir thing. So I'm really not sure changing this
> will be upstreamable. Or perhaps by making it configurable, so that it
> can be overridden using a ./configure option?

I solved my build issue and created a new patch which
adds a configure switch for the correct newlib sysroot
install directory.

Below is an updated pull request with the updated
solution for your review:
https://github.com/tpetazzoni/buildroot/pull/2

I have tested this solution and the patch does
indeed work as expected enabling gcc to find
the newlib libraries for building without my 
fixup solution.

>From my side, your update is ready for merging with
the preference of patching newlib instead of using the fixup.

Also, patches 5-10 are good to go with the exception that
the following needs to be added to all of the zynqmp and
versal defconfigs in patches 7 and 9:
BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BARE_METAL_BUILDROOT_ARCH="microblazeel-xilinx-elf"

Thanks again for your support!

Best regards,
Neal Frager
AMD