is it possible to compile stm32 code on beaglebone (possibly black)?
As it seems platform has to have access to arm-none-eabi-gcc to be able to compile for stm32?
Basically, yes you can.
In order to compile code for stm32 family of mcus you would need a cross-compiler. if you run linux on your beaglebone board you can simply download premade toolchain for your distribution. if you dont find any, you would just build a compiler from source by specifying host and target.
https://wiki.osdev.org/GCC_Cross-Compiler#Preparing_for_the_build this article will help you build a gcc cross compiler for every supported target and host. it takes less then 15 mins.
Few things to note here, once you build your cross compiler, you wont have any kind of libc shiped with it. so get one on github (there are few). your options would be libc or libc-nano (which talks for it self). And from there you will be able to compile code for your stm32 mcu.
For example i ran ubuntu server on my beaglebone black, so in order to compile for stm32 on that, i installed armv7-A gcc compiler, so i can compile for beaglebone it self. then i downloaded source at https://developer.arm.com/tools-and-software/open-source-software/developer-tools/gnu-toolchain/gnu-rm/downloads compile the source and you will have an official arm toolchain for microcontrollers.
Related
In open CV CMakeLists.txt, there is a flag called "BUILD_CUDA_STUBS":
OCV_OPTION(BUILD_CUDA_STUBS "Build CUDA modules stubs when no CUDA SDK" OFF IF (NOT APPLE_FRAMEWORK) )
What does this means? It sounds like, open cv's doc is a bit limited on the build flag.
It’s poorly, or un-, documented.
If BUILD_CUDA_STUBS is enabled, when building, it (supposedly) adds some code (“CUDA stubs”) to replace the CUDA toolkit(’s drivers? IDK), to enable building CUDA-powered code on a machine that does not have the CUDA toolkit installed.
I recommend you just leave it OFF, which is the default, and install the genuine CUDA toolkit on your machine.
Suppose I have a C++ project, and I compile it with gcc and with clang. You can assume that the gcc compiled version runs in another linux machine. Will this imply (in normal circumstances) that the clang version will also run on the other linux machine?
Clang binraries are as portable as gcc binaries are, as long as you are linking to the same libraries and you aren't passing flags like -march=native to the compiler.
Clang has one huge advantage over gcc, it can deal with alsmost all libstdc++ versions,
while gcc is bound to its bundled version and often can't parse any older versions.
So the following often happens in production environments:
Install an LTS distro (Ubuntu 12.04 for example)
Keep gcc, glibc and libstdc++ untouched
Install a recent clang version for C++11, etc
Build the release binaries with clang
So (in my specific example) those binaries will work on all
distros with libstdc++ >= 4.6 and glibc >= 2.15.
This may be an interesting read for you.
If the program is a simple Hello world, it should work on the other machine when compiled through Clang.
But when the program is a real program with a lot a lines and compilation units, and calls to many external libs everything is possible depending on the program itself and the compilation options :
hardware requirements (memory) being different (mainly depends on compilation options)
use of different (versions of) libraries between gcc and clang
UB giving expected results in one and not in the other
different usages for implementation defined rules
use of gcc extensions not accepted by clang
For all of the above except 2 first, it should run on other machines it it runs on one
linux programs depend on their build environment. If your glibc version or kernel is different there will be lots of possibilities that the executable will not be able to run. You could use the interpreter language of llvm though, it compiles into bytecode which can be interpreted on various operating systems.
The answer is, well, depends.
The first hard requirement is the same CPU architecture. 64 Bit is not enough of a qualifier. If you compile of x64 you won't have much success running it on 64-Bit ARM.
The next big one is libraries. If you use any libraries in the program, the target system needs to have those libraries. This includes the kernel headers. So if you compile for e.g. a current kernel version, using the most cutting-edge features, then you will have no joy running that program on a very old version of Linux.
The last one is hardware dependencies. If you create a program that e.g. requires 4 GB of RAM and then try to run it on a small embedded device with 256 MB RAM, that won't work either.
To fit better to your changed question: From my experience there shouldn't be much of a difference in portability between Clang and gcc. Also googling didn't turn up anything, so it should basically work. But better always test stuff like that before you publish some binary in production.
I want to run an .NET executable that needs more than 4G RAM on OSX 10.9. I had Xamarin Studio installed but AFAIKT Xamarin doesn't come with a 64-bit mono build, so I decided to make a custom 64-bit mono with "with-large-heap=yes" configuration, and install it in a different location.
git clone https://github.com/mono/mono
cd mono
./configure --prefix=<my-local-dir> --enable-nls=no --with-large-heap=yes
make
make install
(I also built a 64-bit F# and installed in my-local-dir, following "Option 3" in this page.)
However, when I use the 64-bit mono to run the executable (an F# program built with the canonical "fsharpc" in Xamarin), it still crashes with System.OuOtfMemory exception. I tried this:
export PATH=$PATH:<my-local-dir>/bin
MONO_GC_PARAMS=max-heap-size=5g <my-local-dir>/bin/mono <my-executable>
And it gives a warning
Warning: In environment variable `MONO_GC_PARAMS': `max-heap-size` must be an integer.
(this error message is a bit misleading, I think it really means 5g is too large and not supported, because it doesn't complain if I put a "3g" there). And the program still crash with the same exception at the point when it exceeds the memory.
Did I miss any thing important? How do I configure mono to have more than 4G heap size?
You are still running the 32 bit version of mono (check your PATH env var). This also explains the parsing of 5g for max-heap-size (it will work correctly with 64 bit mono).
The default as with your configure command above is to install in /usr/local/bin, so just run your programs with /usr/local/bin/mono program.exe.
I am trying to build an OS image for TI OMAP4 Pandaboard. The downloaded BSP can be built but very limited without gcc g++ compiler. I think it much difficult to add the tool chain in QNX Momentics IDE, because there are so many files to be added. Can I manually modify the buildfile to do it? If possible, please give me an example. Thanks in advance.
No, it is not possible to run g++ on your TI OMAP4 Pandaboard (unless you build g++ from sources for the ARM platform using the existing QNX toolchain running on an X86 platform).
Why not possible: QNX releases their build tools only for X86-based hosts. The currently supported host OS-es include some variants of Windows, Linux and QNX but the precondition is that the host hardware is X86-based.
Likely you do not actually want to build your library on the target hardware; it should not matter where you actually do the build (except in very special cases where you build some source code based on user input, etc.)
What you need to do is build your library on your development host using the ARM toolchain (QCC if you want to use the high-level tools; ntoarmv7-g++ if you want to use the familiar g++ interface). Once you have your binary you can include it in the .ifs file. You just need to include a line in the .build file, similar to the following example:
/path/on/targetfs/yourbinary=/path/on/buildmachine/yourbinary
If your build environment is configured so that mkifs finds your binary then you can omit the "path/on/buildmachine" part.
If you are fine with having the binary on your target under /proc/boot then you can omit the "/path/on/targetfs/ part as well.
For ease of development it would usually be more convenient for you to store your binary on the SD card with a FAT filesystem. Then you can just copy your binary to the SD without having to rebuild the .ifs file.
Finally, once you get experienced you will want to export a part of your host-machine's filesystem via CIFS or NFS and mount it directly from your target. This will save all the trouble of having to copy files (and, possibly, reboot the target) in each build cycle. But this is far off from your original question.
I think you are trying to get the QNX C/C++ compiler to run on your target board. Correct?
If so, rather than installing the Runtime Kit, you install the QNX Software Development Platform and you should be good to go.
You can also use the System Builder to customize your QNX OS, but this is going to be harder than just using the QNX SDP.
One other note: QNX uses qcc for C and QCC for C++ instead of gcc. They both use gcc under the hood, but to compile on QNX, use qcc instead of gcc.
I am using open source C++ library DCMTK from http://dicom.offis.de/dcmtk.php.en.
I have successfully compiled this library on Windows using VC++ IDE, MacOS Xcode, Mac iOS simulator.
But I am not able to compile this library on iOS device as it is ARM based architecture.
DCMTK library compiled very well on Intel architecture.
Now my problem statement is :-
I need to compile this DCMTK C++ library on ARM architecture by cross compilation.
I am using Ubuntu 64 bit machine for cross compilation.
I have installed binaries from GNU ARM tool chain from http://www.gnuarm.com/
I am using GCC toolchain 4.0 binutils-2.16.1, gcc-4.0.2-c-c++, newlib-1.14.0, insight-6.4, TAR BZ2 [65.5MB] binaries for Ubuntu 64 bit machine for ARM cross compilation.
After Installing these binaries on Ubuntu I have set PATH environment variable to
PATH=$PATH/gnu_arm/bin
For configuring the DCMTK C++ library I have run the following command on shell
CC=arm-elf-gcc CXX=arm-elf-g++ AR=arm-elf-ar RANLIB=arm-elf-ranlib ARFLAGS=cruv ./configure –prefix=$home_dicom –target=arm-elf –host=arm-elf –enable-std-includes –disable-threads
It creates a make file properly. Now I am trying to compile the code by using make command, but facing so many compilation errors like :-
1) I tried to compile my first dependent C++ library that is ofstd.
I got error for DIR*, struct dirent, opendir(), closedir() calls.
It includes for these calls, but I did not found any definitions for the above calls in this header file.
2) When I compile another library oflog I got the following errors like
error: nthos was not declared in this scope
error: ntohl was not declared in this scope
error: htons was not declared in this scope
error: htonl was not declared in this scope.
These calls are networking calls and are not defined in any of the header file from GNU ARM tool.
I tried to download the sources of ARM binaries and extracted the tar files and try to copy missing header files to installed GNU ARM on Ubuntu.
For some files it compiles after doing changes to copied header files, and for some again it gives compilation errors.. There is a loop of compilation errors for every file present under DCMTK library as some of the standard header files are missing.
Please suggest if there is any other tool chain available for ARM cross compilation on Ubuntu 64 bit machine.
Or any other good solution apart from this.
Thanks!!!
Amit
There are many areas for problems when it comes to cross compiling. There are three main flags for cross compiling. -host , -target, and -build. The -host flash is the machine in which the resulting binaries will run on. The -build flash is the system in which you will be compiling on. The -target flag is for building libraries that will be used in cross compiling. So if you were to build your own gcc tool chain. So in your case you won't set the target flag as we're not building a tool chain. the -host flag will be arm-elf. And the -build flag will be amd64.
Usually a cross compilation fails if there are inconsistencies between the regular c compiler and the cross compiler. I have compiled several libraries for the avr32 with a toolchain generated by buildroot, but in some cases (socat project for example) it hasn't been possible.
Your host, your target and the CXX flags look ok. I think it is not necessary to put the AR flag (that is the idea with the host and target option).
In other hand, this is an example for the expat libraries for the avr32:
./configure --host=avr32-linux --prefix=/home/juan/builds/build_expat/ CC=avr32-linux-gcc
make; make install
I can recommend you that tries to cross compile from an ia32 architecture. I had several problems with that ubuntu in the past.