Slarm64-15.0 trusted-firmware-a-master aarch64-none-elf-gcc
 

Greetings Slackware Arm64 community, I have been attempting to build the trusted-firmware-a-master from a default Slarm64-15.0 install, running on a Banana Pi M64.

When I attempt to compile the firmware, I follow the instruction on the website and issue ...
The compile immediately produces the above error ...

All the online pre-packaged aarch64-none-elf-gcc compilers I have found for native Aarch64 systems, are all built from different glibc, so the Slarm64-15.0 system fails to use them successfully. So, now I am left with some question ....

First, what is the difference between the aarch64-slackware-linux-gcc and the aarch64-none-elf-gcc?

Second, Is there a workaround, so I can use the aarch64-slackware-linux-gcc which is already installed in the system rather than an aarch64-none-elf-gcc to compile the trusted-firmware-a-master?

Third, would building an aarch64-none-elf-gcc for slarm64-15.0 and Slackware-current Aarch64 be beneficial for Slackware Arm's & Aarch64's further development? ( Since the trusted-firmware-a-master used by u-boot for Arm / Aarch64 depends on an aarch64-none-elf-gcc compiler )

Fourth, do I need to compile my own aarch64-none-elf-gcc compiler from the gcc-11.2.0 source with ./configure --target=aarch64-none-elf?

Fifth, How would I go about compiling my own aarch64-none-elf-gcc compile if it is more complicated than just ./configure --target=aarch64-none-elf?

Anyway, I'm not sure if this is more of the whole cross-compiling nightmare of using an Arm32/Arm64 systems or not.

Plus: Why do some many build scripts from github assume I am cross-compiling from a x86_64 system?

Oh, Sorry - I forgot to add the URL for the build instructions for the BPI-M64 (Allwinner A64) TF-A bl31.bin

Hi

Slarm64 is a separate community project and has its own forum.

Cheers
s.

Well then - Thank you for telling me I'm not welcome here - it's good to know!

If you're using a different distribution, surely you'd be pleased to be directed appropriately to have your question answered ?

So where is it? Is it on linuxquestions.org? You didn't tell me where to find it, you just told me that is exists.

Besides, Slarm64 is Slackware that is running on an Aarch64 system, it's all Slackware ( Slackware Arm32, Slackware Arm64, Slarm64, Bonslack ) They're all Slackware for ARM / Aarch64 systems.

This is why I hardly ever ask questions on linuxquestions.org, because everyone here would rather, either argue with you about your question, or tell me to go somewhere else.

Slarm64 is Slackware running on an AArch64 system, it's a shame the people in this forum don't want to help resolve a Slackware AArch64 questions.

There are differences. For example, the way Slackware ARM/AArch64's initial RAM disk works is unique to Slackware. It doesn't exist in any of the others you mentioned because they are not Slackware ARM.

Thank you for proving my point!

All you're interested in doing is arguing about the questions I ask, rather than attempt to answer those questions.

My questions have nothing to do with the initial RAM disk. The question is about compiling Aarch64 firmware, for the Allwinner A64 SoC, and regardless of which flavor of Slackware ARM/AArch64 a person is running the questions remain, the same.

What is the difference between the aarch64-slackware-linux-gcc and the aarch64-none-elf-gcc? <- See, that questions has nothing to do with an initial RAM disk.

If you don't know how to help answer a question, then just say, "I don't know what the difference is between aarch64-slackware-linux-gcc and aarch64-none-elf-gcc, I don't know if there is a workaround, nor do I know how to help you compile an aarch64-none-elf-gcc."

See, the only way the question would not be relevant in this forum, is if your version of Slackware AArch64, does not have aarch64-slackware-linux-gcc. However, if the flavor of Slackware AArch64, you are currently running does have aarch64-slackware-linux-gcc installed in it, then my question remain relevant, even within this forum.

What's the difference between aarch64-slackware-linux-gcc and aarch64-none-elf-gcc? Is there a workaround? And do, and how, can I compile aarch64-none-elf-gcc on Slackware AArch64? <- See, once again nothing about an initial RAM disk.

You're welcome!

Just posting this here for my own future reference ...

https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slarm64-132/

So, here is how this whole conversation could have gone ...

Stragonian - Q: aarch64-none-elf-gcc error when compiling TF-A, help?

drmozes - A: Check out the content on the Slackware ARM ftp server, under slackwarearm-devtools and bootware. I used (and/or wrote or modified) when I faced a similar situation related to my own TF-A. Particularly focus on the "atf.build" script written by Brenton Earl, and modified by myself in the slackwarearm/platform/aarch64/bootware/src/.

It may not be a total solution to your problem, but it might help aid you in your efforts. You can find those resources here ...

ftp://ftp.arm.slackware.com/slackwar...rearm-devtools and
ftp://ftp.arm.slackware.com/slackwar.../bootware/src/

Stragonian (response): Golly gee wiz! Thank you, Mr.drmozes, I sure will take a look at those slackwarearm-devtools and bootware directories on the Slackware ARM ftp server, thank you for that information!

drmozes (response): You're welcome! Just be glad I didn't go all Official Slackware ARM release tribal on your *ss, and tell you to go ask your Slackware ARM/AArch64 question somewhere else. Just think of all the time you would have wasted looking for similar TF-A resources on the internet.

Stragonian (response): Yeah, I know, I would have spent hours searching the internet before running across an obscure link to your own bootware arm-trusted-firmware source directory and found all those files, scripts and documents you left for yourself related to your own TF-A situation.

Fictitious humans are so much cooler than real humans. - :-)

was clear to me, outside of scope referring to inside of scope

Wow! Thank you for once again proving my point you're not about community or helping other people, but rather semantics and tribalism.

Oh! look a person posting a question about Slam64 in the Slackware forum (Slam64 wasn't an official Slackware Release)

Oh Wow! And look AceofSpades19, onebuck, JustInterested, T3slider, onebuck, Woodsman discuss the question with him, rather than tell him "Slam64 is a separate community project and has its own forum."

Let's count how many times they tell him to go to the Slam64 forum? Oh! Look! It's 0 times.

https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...ecture-642229/

Oh, and look here again another person Drone4four, joining xaos5's post, and shares his experience using Slam64 with xaos5 related to a sound problem, on the Slackware forum, let's count how many times Drone4four is told "Slam64 is a separate community project and has its own forum." Oh! Look once again it's 0 times.

https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...roblem-269973/

So, I guess there have been some good natured people on the Slackware forum, who both ask questions, and help others to answer questions of a Slam64 nature.

Not to worry, my learning curve is not a flat line. I mistakenly assumed that the people on this forum were good natured people, I will not make that mistake again. If semantics and tribalism is your thing, then I will leave you both to them.