With the patch file accepted by gas and clang integrated assembler
pushaw.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for
Also discovered with clang integrated assembler
miswid.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://
Discovered by clang integrated assembler
invhex.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.ne
clang integrated assembler does not like the mixture of Intel and AT&T syntax.
intsyn.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynami
Hi Amit,
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Amit Mahadik wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to boot the kernel with FDT support. I have applied the
> following patch to the kernel
> v 3.3rc1 git://gitorious.org/omap-pm/linux.gitdt_test/build_uimage_append
> added CONFIG_ARM_APPENDED_DTB=y in
> om
Hello,
I am trying to boot the kernel with FDT support. I have applied the following
patch to the kernel
v
3.3rc1 git://gitorious.org/omap-pm/linux.git
dt_test/build_uimage_append added CONFIG_ARM_APPENDED_DTB=y in
omap2plus_defconfig and made a uImage-dtb.omap4-panda image running
The EmulatorPkg is ported to X64 but it only currently runs on Linux and OS X.
I'd be happy if some one ports it to Windows, so we have one emulator that runs
everywhere and does IA32 and X64.
It would also be cool to port the EmulatorPkg to ARM. Given the use of X11 it
would should be possibl
What I usually do is build a 32-bit version of my application when I am testing
under NT32Pkg.
Currently there is no 64-bit version of Nt32 and I have not heard of any plans
to develop it.
Tim
From: David F. [mailto:df7...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 7:08 PM
To: edk2-devel@li
But the problem is I need to build X64 EFI applications because all the
systems are using X64 versions. If I try to boot the IA32 shell the
systems refuse until the X64 shell is used, and from there I can't run the
IA32 applications, need to be built as x64.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Tim
NT32Pkg cannot be built as X64. You can still run the 32-bit version under X64
windows.
Tim
From: David F. [mailto:df7...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 6:56 PM
To: edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [edk2] Nt32Pkg (or a new Nt64Pkg)
It's if I change target.txt items:
It's if I change target.txt items:
TARGET_ARCH = IA32
TOOL_CHAIN_TAG= VS2008x86
To:
TARGET_ARCH = X64
TOOL_CHAIN_TAG= VS2008
and then just type
build
tells me the
Invalid ARCH specified. [Valid ARCH: IA32]
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Joe Vernaci w
Hi David,
It should be able to build under windows using VS2008. Can you copy paste
your build command as well as the output with error?
--Joe
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 9:08 PM, David F. wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I downloaded the UDK2010.SR1.UP1 and tried to build x64 target under
> windows (VS2008) bu
Hi,
I downloaded the UDK2010.SR1.UP1 and tried to build x64 target under
windows (VS2008) but it complained the arch wasn't supported.
Unfortunately most systems with UEFI are x64 and will only run the x64
shell and x64 applications. So I'm curious why you can't build x64 apps
under Windows?? Is
Hi Everyone, and thank you all for the answers.
Andrew
My idea was to be able to save my application in svn or git, without need
to save udk too.
So everyone would be able to have udk in any directory and the application
in another directory, for example c:/user/CompanyProjects/UEFIProject1
Rod
I
Sathya,
Add my comments below.
Thanks,
Eric
From: Prakash, Sathya [mailto:sathya.prak...@lsi.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 3:59 AM
To: edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [edk2] suppressif expression
Excerpt from VFR Spec:
ideqvalExp ::=
"ideqval"
vfrQuestionDataFieldName "==" Numb
Hi Olivier,
I'll post to u...@uefi.org, but wanted to clarify the SCT
version here. I am using SCT 2.3 w/ARM patches. Also looked at the UEFI
SCT Plug Fest 2012 release as well. BTW, I found the source code for
GenBin in a very early release v2.0. There is a bug in this source
On Jan 30, 2013, at 2:43 PM, Rod Smith wrote:
> On 01/30/2013 02:06 PM, Richardson, Brian wrote:
>> ... of course my "it has to be done under the workspace" comment
>> assumes you haven't mastered the art of makefile modifications. Rod's
>> solution obviously works (since rEFInd works) but it in
Hi Steven,
quick response. Which version of SCT are you using ? Are you using the one from
the section 'UEFI Specifications and Tools' or the one you got from the
'Members Pages' ?
Linaro is a member of the UEFI Forum. So you should have access to the members
page (where you could get the latest
Hi,
I am working for Linaro and trying to complete the build
process regarding SCT. The issue that I am running into is not being able
to locate ~/Tools/Bin/GenBin_lin_{32 or 64}. I noticed a past message:
>Hi Nagi,
> Thank you for finding the issue in your side. I could not f
On 01/30/2013 02:06 PM, Richardson, Brian wrote:
> ... of course my "it has to be done under the workspace" comment
> assumes you haven't mastered the art of makefile modifications. Rod's
> solution obviously works (since rEFInd works) but it involves a bit
> more effort.
>
> I'm a bit lazy, so I d
Excerpt from VFR Spec:
ideqvalExp ::=
"ideqval"
vfrQuestionDataFieldName "==" Number
Hi,
Is it legal to use less than or greater than symbol within suppressif
expression? Please advice.
For example:
suppressif ideqval Form001.VolumeCount < 1;
endif;
If the above expression is illegal, how to u
IMHO supporting an alternate workspace would not be a bad feature for some
users. Its probably technically not that hard to do, but just hard to find all
the places that would need to get updated.
Andrew Fish
On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:06 AM, "Richardson, Brian"
wrote:
> ... of course my "it ha
... of course my "it has to be done under the workspace" comment assumes you
haven't mastered the art of makefile modifications. Rod's solution obviously
works (since rEFInd works) but it involves a bit more effort.
I'm a bit lazy, so I don't mess with the makefiles. :)
Thanks ... br
---
Brian
The compiled code needs to be under the workspace directory. Everything in EDK
II is relative to the workspace as the 'root' directory. Just make your own
sub-directory under the workspace.
Thanks ... br
---
Brian Richardson -- brian.richard...@intel.com -- Twitter: intel_brian
-Original Me
On 01/30/2013 06:23 AM, Rafael Machado wrote:
> Hi everyone
> I have a doubt about how to compile an uefi application in a directory
> that is not at the same directory as UDK.
> I have an application that is in a directory located inside the UDK
> directory, for example c:/UDK2010/MyApplication ,
Rafael,
In the edk2 every things is relative to the $WORKSPACE. You will need to setup
the workspace in the c:/UDK2010 directory by doing the edksetup.bat. Everything
is relative to the $WORKSPACE. So for example packages are found relative to
the workspace the build.exe command is relative to
Sateesh,
There are two classes of drivers in EFI:
1) Device Drivers
2) Bus drivers
A device driver, like your example, adds a protocol to an existing handle. A
Bus driver adds child handles.
In your case I think you will find that there already is a device path on the
PciIo handle that was cr
27 matches
Mail list logo
