-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
Revert "Warn with ARMC6 and not v8m" #9398
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks. Looks good to me.
I think they would also quite like this backported to a 5.11.y so they can get a clean-looking build prior to official Mbed OS 5.12 release. I leave that open to debate - maybe with sufficient disclaimers elsewhere... |
Fine with me cc @bulislaw |
If we can rebase, will fix travis |
NOTE: This PR has now been rebased. If this was made in error, feel free to force-push your local branch to restore the PR. |
Marked for 5.12 for now. If ARMc6 support slips, past that RC, we'll need to re-enable the message. I'm sure you've informed them that the main reason around the message is to help set user expectations as to what compilers are actively supported. |
SIGH
mbed-os |
This reverts commit 3f68411.
NOTE: This PR has now been rebased. If this was made in error, feel free to force-push your local branch to restore the PR. |
CI started |
Test run: SUCCESSSummary: 11 of 11 test jobs passed |
Description
A requested change from the toolchain guys, who are working on getting ARMC6 support online - the the misleading message "ARMC6 does not support ARM architecture v7" is winding them up.
Not clear we need any message at this point, at least on master. Maybe we will need something more specific about targets later, once we can pin down restrictions.
This reverts commit 3f68411.
Marked it as a "docs update", as it doesn't change the build result, just what the build prints. That probably doesn't make any sense.
Pull request type
Reviewers
@theotherjimmy