On 9.8.2013 2:14, Zbigniew Halas wrote: > On Thursday, August 08, 2013 01:58:41 PM Jiri Svoboda wrote: >> Hi Zbigniew, >> >> Zbigniew Halas wrote: >>> I was thinking of that approach as well. The only drawback is that some >> >> libm >> >>> functions (or rather stubs) are implemented as part of HelenOS POSIX >> >> library >> >>> and they are required to build some components being part of HelenOS >> >> (binutils >> >>> at least). >> >> These are apparently stubs and there is no reason why math functions should >> be in the POSIX library. >> >>> It could be solved by using proper linking order or by separating libm >>> functions from POSIX library which will allow to link POSIX library >>> independently from libm. >>> If you think it's a proper solution I will do that. >> >> I don't think that's the way to do it. Why should we have two different >> copies of the functions, one working and one non-working? > > It's Jakub's idea to keep libm outside of HelenOS, and if we are going to > keep > binutils inside of HelenOS we still need that stuff.
I didn't mean it as some sort of a dogma. Just put the math library somewhere where you think it would be most helpful for your work on porting Python and do not get sidetracked by this. It can be always reshuffled later. Jakub _______________________________________________ HelenOS-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.modry.cz/listinfo/helenos-devel
