Matt:
There are several topics in your note, so I'm a bit confused. Let me try to
take them in turn.
I think a centos vm is closest to what I was advocating, and the path
> of least resistance from where are...
If the goal is to help people get set up quickly, I think that setting up a
reference VM image isn't helpful in practice. It is *much* faster to
net-install a CentOS image (or any other major distribution) by pulling
from the major repositories than it is to copy a reference virtual machine
image.
Once you have the base image installed, the Coyotos/CapROS host-xenv
package exists to ensure that any additional packages you need get
installed.
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Matt Rice <[email protected]> wrote:
> At that point I started evaluating the toolchain itself, with a focus
> on coyotos/capros eventually self hosting. Without posix emulation I
> don't think it'll ever run the GNU tools filenames are ubiquitous
> throughout all of them, with the bfd library wanting to
> open()/close().
>
Yes. These tools are designed to live in a POSIX world. There is no
realistic hope of separating them from that world.
> so I started to look into llvm and outside of the pesky libstdc++
> dependency...
I'm not clear why we would look at LLVM, unless perhaps for performance
reasons. There are some compiler features that LLVM is missing for kernel
compiles, but it might be worth a look.
But if the goal is to be able to write domains in C++, I think a better
path is to get libstdc++ and g++ ported.
Jonathan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
CapROS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/capros-devel
