>See, the difference between gcc 4.2.1 and 4.7.2 is big, there are lots of changes
>and usually one needs to play a bit with compiler flags.
yes, i know that the difference is big. and while i have used gcc since... let me think... v2.95, i always was too lazy to study all it's options.

not that i'm ranting, i just described what i found while installing the things. and yes, i'm actively using c99 (gnu99, to be honest). and sorry... i just forgot about it, it is natural as breathing. so yes, it's my bad with inlining and standards. thank you for clarification.

btw, is there any need to use PIC code for ARM .so (except that relocations kills page sharing)? it's the first time i'm writing/porting something for ARM.

>However, feel free to edit the page if you feel something should go there
nope, i'm still new to scratchbox, and i'm not ready for building my own cross-compiling toolchain (it's not *that* hard to build gcc suite, but all that -dev .debs one need to compile reasonably big project for n900...). that's why i came to ask what i missed. thank you for your answers, i see some light now. %-)

btw, is there any 'standard' flag in DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS (or something) that i can use to detect thumb2 builds? sure, i can check gcc version, but it looks like a dirty trick. and some of my projects (my build system is one of that) just can't be built with optimisations and pointer aliasing on gcc 4.2.

if there will be some flag in DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS -- something like "thumb2", for example, i can easily check it in debian/rules and have automated builds for both 'arm' and 'thumb' for free. sure, i added such flag in my scratchbox config, but if it will be standardized some way, any developer can use it. %-)